Joe Bastardi · Jul. 11, 2019
On Tuesday, Weatherbell.com started covering the threat of flooding in New Orleans, and it’s a very real threat. But a storm like Barry, assuming it makes landfall as far west as we think it will, would not contain the same kind of threat if not for some preexisting conditions that occurred in the winter and spring.
Back on April 23, I warned about how tropical cyclones would be used as ammo in the weaponization of the weather. That forecast is already coming true with today’s threat.
First of all, we identified this threat last week. I’ve been very noisy about it because it is emblematic of the kind of season we have predicted, with scattershot in-close development and likely below-average activity in the main development regions of the Atlantic. So there’s nothing magical or mysterious about this storm developing from a feature that originated well away from the deep tropics.
In fact, I talked about this on Neil Cavuto’s show last week. A notorious example was Alicia in 1983, which developed south of Louisiana from a feature that originated from the north. The storm went on to hit as a Category 3 hurricane southwest of Galveston, TX. So the idea that this week’s storm should intensify quite rapidly before reaching the coast has been discussed since last week.
But what makes this storm so different and so threatening to New Orleans is how high the Mississippi River is. The reason it is so high is because of the late, cold winter in the Great Plains. Prodigious snowfall resulted in enhanced snowmelt, which was followed by above-normal rainfall.
What is particularly galling is that around the turn of the century, there was hysteria about snow being a thing of the past. Yet snow is increasing in the Northern Hemisphere! Then, back in 2013, after the hot summers of 2010-12 were blamed on climate change (even though the heat and drought were similar to 1952-1954 and could not hold a candle to the 1930s), there were predictions that a new dust bowl would develop due to climate change. I publicly challenged that notion in 2013 on several outlets. Here we are several years later and the question is: How can you blame “man-made climate change” when the result was exactly opposite of what was being predicted?