Joe Biden Spins Tornado Misinformation

From the CO2 Coalition

Gregory Wrightstone – December 12, 2021

President Joe Biden wasted no time in politicizing the recent tornado tragedy that claimed nearly 100 lives in Kentucky, Illinois, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Missouri. Speaking less than 24 hours after the devastation of communities and lives, Biden linked the storms to man-made climate change.

“All I know is that the intensity of the weather across the board has some impacts as a consequence of the warming of the planet and climate change,” Biden said. “The fact is that we all know everything is more intense when the climate is warming. Everything. And obviously it has some impact here.”

Is that really the case? Have violent tornadoes been increasing? The answer to that question is clear, but you won’t find the answer at the agency most responsible for monitoring such things. It appears that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is playing games with tornado data. In 2017, while researching tornado data, I archived the NOAA site’s page on tornadoes and data. At the time, NOAA specifically warned that pre-Doppler radar records of tornadoes (before 1995) are unreliable:

“One of the main difficulties with tornado records is that a tornado, or evidence of a tornado, must have been observed. Unlike rainfall or temperature, which may be measured by a fixed instrument, tornadoes are short-lived and very unpredictable. A tornado in a largely unoccupied region is not likely to be documented. Many significant tornadoes may not have made it into the historical record since Tornado Alley was very sparsely populated during the early 20th Century.”

Because of this, NOAA recommended (at the time) only using the strongest tornadoes as a measure of pre-Doppler numbers and provided this chart that documented an overall decrease in the number of strong and violent storms that were categorized as ≥EF 3 (I have added the carbon emissions to the chart).

Figure 1 – Tornadoes: NOAA (2017) NCEI Historical Records and Trends, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-information/extreme-events/us-tornado-climatology/trends CO2: Boden 2016 Global Regional and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions. CDIAC

Accessing the very same link for NOAA today takes one to their latest iteration, which showcases a chart of ALL tornadoes dating back to 1950 and shows a steady and significant rise in the number of tornadoes from 1950 to the late 1990s. Bear in mind, that just a few years ago, NOAA specifically warned against using exactly this data because it would under-count the numbers before 1995.

Figure 2 – Tornadoes: NOAA (2017) NCEI Historical Records and Trends, https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/climate-information/extreme-events/us-tornado-climatology/trends

Updated data on tornadoes through 2020 is available at ustornadoes.com and showcases just why using pre-Doppler data is misleading. Figure 3 shows the pre-Doppler numbers of tornadoes reported. Importantly, this is not capturing increasing actual numbers of tornadoes that occurred, but rather increased reporting.

Figure 3 – US Pre-Doppler Tornadoes https://www.ustornadoes.com/annual-tornadoes/

Figure 4, below, is a chart of all Doppler-era tornadoes showing no increase at all.

Figure 4 – US pre-Doppler Tornadoes https://www.ustornadoes.com/annual-tornadoes

All of this begs the question: Why would a government agency promote flawed data? The answer is simple: It “confirms” their preconceived notion of increasing severe weather and provides support for alarming claims of ever-increasing death and destruction.

You can be sure that Joe Biden will not be the last to use these deaths and this tornado deception to spread fear and alarm to support their plans to spend trillions of dollars to solve a non-existent climate crisis. The Biden administration should “follow the science” and get to the business of helping the victims and stop spreading misinformation.

Gregory Wrightstone is a geologist, executive director of the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Va., and author of “Inconvenient Facts: The science that Al Gore doesn’t want you to know.”

This commentary was first published by The CO2 Coalition December 12, 2021.

5 33 votes
Article Rating
132 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Steve Reddish
December 12, 2021 6:08 pm

“we all know everything is more intense when the climate is warming”

Including blizzards?

Derg
Reply to  Steve Reddish
December 12, 2021 6:23 pm

18” of snow recently. Ahh winter.

Simon should be along any moment with his stupidity

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Derg
December 13, 2021 6:33 am

I drive a battery car and you don’t!”

Sara
Reply to  Steve Reddish
December 12, 2021 6:43 pm

We had snow yesterday. It didn’t last, but it was real and cold and the birds were still flying south to get away from it.

But what else do you expect from someone who is so separated from reality that he will sign anything without reading it, because he’s told to do so by his wifey?

Steve Reddish
Reply to  Sara
December 13, 2021 12:53 am

Snow day before yesterday and single digit lows.
I expect nothing coherent from Biden. He fulfills my lowest expectations.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Sara
December 13, 2021 9:49 am

Let’s Go Brandon!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dave Fair
December 13, 2021 2:01 pm

I heard today on the news that people selling “Let’s go Brandon” Christmas present wrapping have sold enough wrapping to cover six football fields with wrapping.

I may have to get some of that. 🙂

Reply to  Sara
December 13, 2021 6:54 pm

Same here in Northern California. The local forecast is for temps around the mid 20s F for at least the next 10 days.

MarkW
Reply to  Steve Reddish
December 12, 2021 8:20 pm

“we all know everything is more intense when the climate is warming”

Actually, we don’t know that at all.

Paul Johnson
Reply to  Steve Reddish
December 12, 2021 8:57 pm

Especially the hysteria about the climate warming.

griff
Reply to  Steve Reddish
December 13, 2021 12:54 am

Yes, sometimes including blizzards.

HotScot
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 1:31 am

LOL. So it’s not global warming then.

Brad-DXT
Reply to  HotScot
December 13, 2021 11:20 am

It is quite obvious that griff is not an honest responder. He/she/it is not visiting this site to learn. He/she/it is replying in order to get reactions to either get paid or for some other nefarious reason.
I think we would be better served to just ignore the posts he/she/it provides.

HotScot
Reply to  Brad-DXT
December 14, 2021 1:06 pm

griff was a long time visitor to this site but was routinely humiliated so stropped off saying he would never be back.

Then he couldn’t resist it and thought drive by commenting would be a smart move. It didn’t work, he just gets humiliated anyway.

fretslider
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 4:26 am

“we all know everything is more intense when the climate is warming””

Yes, sometimes including blizzards.”

This reply gets the Holdren prize.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 7:25 am

No matter what it is, if it’s bad, CO2 caused.
Doesn’t matter how many times it’s happened before.
Doesn’t matter if it was worse in the past, CO2 caused it this time.
If you don’t believe that you are an evil denier and will be cancelled. With prejudice.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 9:56 am

no shame

ResourceGuy
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 1:24 pm

Go away.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 2:03 pm

“Yes, sometimes including blizzards.”

Of course! What else would we expect you to say. CO2 causes all kinds of weather, according to Griff. He doesn’t explain how that happens, but he makes the claim anyway.

Last edited 9 months ago by Tom Abbott
December 12, 2021 6:09 pm

Spinning tragedies into talking points is how the left supports their precipitous goals.

Brad-DXT
Reply to  co2isnotevil
December 13, 2021 9:14 am

They never let a crisis or tragedy go to waste. There’s money in confusion.

J Mac
Reply to  co2isnotevil
December 13, 2021 9:57 am

Boogeyman!

Sweet Old Bob
December 12, 2021 6:15 pm

LGBT …
Lets Go Brandon TODAY !
😉

Mumbles McGuirck
December 12, 2021 6:24 pm

Joe Biden says what his teleprompter tells him to say. It’s the hidden toadies at the White House who write these things.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
December 12, 2021 6:33 pm

END MESSAGE

David A
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
December 12, 2021 9:50 pm

“Period, what are we doing the rest of the day, I don’t want to get into trouble.”

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  David A
December 13, 2021 6:35 am

“Is this where I stand?”

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
December 13, 2021 2:11 pm

Biden should not have to ask where to stand. He and Kamala’s handlers have the floor marked to show them where they should stand.

Just follow the markers Joe and Kamala.

Can you believe these two idiots are running our nation? Running it into the ground, it what they are doing.

Impeachment and removal from office should be in store for these delusional, radical Democrats. The New U.S. House of Representatives will form just a little over a year from now, in January 2023.

Then the reckoning begins.

Last edited 9 months ago by Tom Abbott
Dennis
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
December 13, 2021 1:15 am

He’s still a moron.

MarkW
Reply to  Dennis
December 13, 2021 7:26 am

Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.

Ron Long
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
December 13, 2021 2:04 am

That’s right, Mumbles. Brandon reads what is written for him (OK, sometimes he speaks spontaneously and then the White House kills his mic if they can). Whoever writes his stuff was not elected to be Commander in Chief. Susan Rice is one of my leading candidates for the hidden control. Russia and China are emboldened, wait for what’s next.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Ron Long
December 13, 2021 2:14 pm

“Susan Rice is one of my leading candidates for the hidden control.”

She’s definitely highly involved. She’s Obama’s flunky. She does what Obama tells her to do.

Mr.
December 12, 2021 6:30 pm

But on a practical level, it doesn’t really matter how many tornados come to carry your house away – one is sufficient.

Nick B.
December 12, 2021 6:37 pm

Propaganda is everywhere. It was a question on Miss Universe today – “Somebody saying that climate change is a hoax, what would be your answer to that person?”.

Reply to  Nick B.
December 12, 2021 11:32 pm

Earth’s climate had changed and changed over the millennia and has absolutely NOTHING to do with mankind. Liberals are low IQ and are only interested in running your life for you, nothing else. Of course, climate will change whether we’re here or not.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Brett Short
December 13, 2021 10:51 am

I was thinking today that the way most of our societies work is if Gilligan, of Gilligan’s Island fame, were to declare that he was the smartest person on the island and tell everyone that they should follow his advice.

bonbon
Reply to  Nick B.
December 13, 2021 1:30 am

Wrong question – Miss Universe, the Big Bang is a hoax, what do you say?

whatlanguageisthis
Reply to  Nick B.
December 13, 2021 10:29 am

“First, I don’t think anyone should be shamed for being a hoax. We all deserve love. Change is good thing we should always have hope for change. Climate deserves to benefit from change just like everyone else. We should all get our fair share of change. In closing, I do appreciate you using the inclusive form of hoax and not the binary exclusive cis-gendered version. Thank you.”

Did I guess right? I didn’t watch.

Barb
December 12, 2021 7:16 pm

Dementia puppet chibiden is so worried about global warming that there is a huge backup of cargo ships that have been dumping feces, and chemicals into the ocean 24-7.

markl
December 12, 2021 7:45 pm

Never let a weather disaster go to waste.

griff
Reply to  markl
December 13, 2021 12:55 am

Yes, and so many of them recently

HotScot
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 1:33 am

Like?

Disputin
Reply to  HotScot
December 13, 2021 2:56 am

Oh, Griff’s gone.

MarkW
Reply to  Disputin
December 13, 2021 7:29 am

This week’s griff just does drive by’s.

Alan M
Reply to  MarkW
December 13, 2021 2:46 pm

Griff can’t drive

Reply to  Disputin
December 13, 2021 7:31 am

Drive by shooter?

Dave Fair
Reply to  John VC
December 13, 2021 9:53 am

Shooting from the lip.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 7:28 am

If it’s bad, CO2 caused it. The sacred models have spoken.

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 9:55 am

Data? Oh, I’m sorry: A Twitter social influencer said it so it must be true.

Paul
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 1:38 pm

Ho Hum… next

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 2:18 pm

“Yes, and so many of them recently”

it happens every year, Griff.

It’s just weather, Griff.

Gyan1
December 12, 2021 7:46 pm

This has been going on for a long time. Links to official data that don’t support the fear mongering disappear with no easy way to retrive the information. It happens when people post the links in public forums.

I had the violent tornadoes link saved and noticed it was replace by the opposite looking chart when I just checked.

I have a friend who grew up under Soviet rule. She says the censorship happening now in the US is worse than the USSR back then.

Tom Halla
December 12, 2021 8:11 pm

If you live in an area with tornadoes, like Central Texas, pretty much every severe thunderstorm line will produce something that shows as a rotating disturbance that does not reach the ground or cause any damage.
As Doppler radar coverage is quite extensive in the US, that sort of artifact will show on the record. Most of the local TV news weather warnings never pan out.

Independent
December 12, 2021 8:16 pm

It drives me crazy when people who know better use alarmist rhetoric such as “carbon emissions” (in the chart). Please fix to align with reality!

Steve Case
Reply to  Independent
December 12, 2021 9:45 pm

Good catch, I missed that one. The honcho’s running the CO2 Coalition need to take Gregory Wrightstone aside and tell him that using the enemy’s terminology is not the way to win a propaganda war.

HotScot
Reply to  Steve Case
December 13, 2021 1:35 am

It makes sense to talk to them in their language when debunking them though.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  HotScot
December 13, 2021 2:56 am

but then we’d have to say “carbon pollution”- that’s the one that pisses me off

MarkW
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
December 13, 2021 7:30 am

CO2 emissions, or carbon emissions, we are talking about the same thing.
Since CO2 is not “pollution”, there is no need to adopt that language.

Jeff Alberts
December 12, 2021 8:21 pm

All of this begs the question: Why would a government agency promote flawed data?”

That’s not begging the question, that’s raising the question.

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
December 12, 2021 11:35 pm

“Beg the question” is the wrong terminology. Learn how to debate.

Johanus
Reply to  Brett Short
December 13, 2021 10:32 am

Grammar (constraints on structure and semantics of language) is utltimately a reflection of usage. It is not ever chiseled in stone forever. So you have not been updating your knowledge of grammar:

beg the question (third-person singular simple present begs the questionpresent participle begging the questionsimple past and past participle begged the question)

  1. (philosophylogiclaw) To engage in the logical fallacy of begging the question (petitio principii). quotations ▼
  2. To sidestep or fail to address a question. quotations ▼
  3. (sometimes proscribed) To raise or prompt a question.
  4. Three people were hurt in the fire at the warehouse last night, which begs the question: what were they doing there in the first place?

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/beg_the_question

Rich Davis
Reply to  Johanus
December 13, 2021 2:44 pm

“Sometimes proscribed”
(Not by the uneducated)

Johanus
Reply to  Rich Davis
December 13, 2021 5:12 pm

It ain’t proscribed here.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Johanus
December 13, 2021 10:36 pm

Irregardless 😜, I will stick with original usage. If others flaunt their ignorance of proper usage, that ain’t 😜 my problem.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
December 13, 2021 10:01 am

The phrase “begging the question” has morphed from its original meaning in English language usage, which is always changing/evolving.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Rich Davis
December 13, 2021 5:43 pm

A long time ago I read that the English Language is the most versatile and changeable of all major languages. One must keep up to communicate well, the goal of all languages.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Dave Fair
December 13, 2021 10:40 pm

Ah Dave, what can I say, but on fleek?

A language that is truly flexible would change everything on a regular basis. That will make it less likely that anyone mistakes the ideas of old farts and dead white men as having any relevance.

Chris Nisbet
December 12, 2021 9:22 pm

Last night our national broadcaster in NZ told us the reason for the tornadoes was clear – the climate crisis.
Tonight we hear that tornado season was meant to be over by now but the climate crisis is making things worse.
It simply never ends.

griff
Reply to  Chris Nisbet
December 13, 2021 12:56 am

Tonight we hear that tornado season was meant to be over by now but the climate crisis is making things worse.

Because that’s what is happening

HotScot
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 1:39 am

Evidence dear boy. Things don’t just happen because you want them to.

For example, I read somewhere that the SE of England has more tornadoes than tornado valley.

But there’s just too many variables i.e. more than two, for you to critically analyse that.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 7:32 am

Got any data to show that things are getting worse?
So far the data shows it isn’t.

Dave Fair
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 10:04 am

Using bold lettering clinches one’s argument. Data is so cis-white sciency.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Dave Fair
December 13, 2021 11:01 am

At least he wasn’t SHOUTING.

MarkW
Reply to  Chris Nisbet
December 13, 2021 7:32 am

Anyone who says that winter tornadoes are unusual, simply has never studied the topic. Or lying.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Chris Nisbet
December 13, 2021 11:00 am

It is very difficult to reason with hysterics. “griff” is a good example of that. His motto should be, “Don’t confuse me with facts. My mind is made up.”

griff
December 13, 2021 12:54 am

This was a very extreme event, likely the most extreme of its type in recorded history in those states, at an untypical time of year.

Look at the scale of it…

and this is the 4th extreme weather event in America in 6 months.

It defies reason and probability to keep saying ‘this is just weather’ and ‘no climate change influence’

HotScot
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 1:45 am

This was a very extreme event, likely the most extreme of its type in recorded history in those states”

That’ll be your opinion.

“at an untypical time of year”

Do tornadoes function to a calendar then?

Why does it defy reason? It’s a one off event, if this was a recurring pattern then there might be cause for concern, but so far it’s not.

MarkW
Reply to  HotScot
December 13, 2021 7:35 am

The mechanics of what causes tornadoes was explained to griff yesterday. As usual it didn’t listen because knowing what it talks about would make it a less efficient spokesman for the cause.

Matt Kiro
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 2:17 am

Typically one region or another in the US is in drought conditions during the year. This is just part of the climate. Forest fires have always happened. Floods happen every year.
Almost every weather event can be mitigated against with proper planning and engineering.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Matt Kiro
December 13, 2021 3:03 am

It wasn’t all that long ago that most humans had no idea what was happening on the other side of the hill- now we know about every flood, drought, fire, tornado, blizzard, and crime on the planet- it’s a big planet- this sort of stuff is happening at every minute of every day, somewhere- and always has. Doesn’t mean it’s a climate catastrophe. What’s really amazing is that most of the time, for most of us, nothing out of the ordinary is happening. Given the fact that the Earth is a big rock spinning around a giant nuclear reactor- it’s amost a miracle.

MarkW
Reply to  Matt Kiro
December 13, 2021 7:37 am

griff doesn’t do basic statistics (neither do most “climate scientists”) he’s been told that the earth is only permitted 1 once in a thousand year events per thousand years. Anywhere on the planet. If 2 happen, that is proof that CO2 is gonna kill us all.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  MarkW
December 13, 2021 2:26 pm

Griff doesn’t have a good grasp of the situation. He listens to too many alarmists.

Griff sees CO2 in everything, kind of like Greta does.

Last edited 9 months ago by Tom Abbott
garboard
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 3:34 am

1974 tornado outbreak in US killed almost 200 people : 100 tornados on ground at one time ; 184 total ; 34 F1 . occurred during period of cooling planet .

Patick B
Reply to  garboard
December 13, 2021 8:25 am

Yep. I was there in 1974 – we spotted an F1 about two miles away and were going to head for the basement, but realized it was moving parallel to our street, so we stood on the front porch watching it. Looked like a flock of birds around it until we realized those were roofs and debris. About 10 – 15 minutes later it was moving out of sight. We wondered over to a neighbor who came out and we asked if he saw the tornado. He said yes and pointed in the direction of our backyards – there had been a second tornado a few miles away in that direction we never noticed.

MarkW
Reply to  garboard
December 13, 2021 11:12 am

The population in the mid-west has increased quite a bit over the intervening 47 years.

Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 3:39 am

It’s always weather. After 30 years you may start to talk about climate. And this one event disappears in the dust of others.

Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 4:13 am

You missed the evidence shown by Roy Spencer here at WUWT that unusual cold was the reason for the tornado event. But as you never target on evidences I don’t wonder about your moronic comment.

MarkW
Reply to  Krishna Gans
December 13, 2021 7:38 am

Since Dr. Spencer’s science lacks the seal of approval of the global climate cabal, it doesn’t exist.

Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 4:43 am

The worst tornado outbreak I remember in my area was in the 1980’s and it was late November. Having lived in the eastern United States all my life I can tell you that December tornado outbreaks are neither rare nor unusual. The worst tornado outbreaks are always spring and autumn, never summer the hottest months. This is because the worst severe weather is caused by a clash of warm and cold air, something that is absent in a warmer world.

I was born in the winter. The day I was born, it snowed, two days later, it was 70F (21C). Weather history is the enemy of the global warming movement.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Wade
December 13, 2021 5:48 pm

Please, Wade, speculation trumps experience in CliSciFi.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 6:01 am

Griff, you moron. For the thousandth time, WEATHER IS NOT CLIMATE. It is big news now however, and everything gets videoed and hyped 24-7. That wasn’t the case before. Give it a rest. Every time you comment, you display your stunning ignorance of both weather and climate, as well as your weapons-grade stupidity.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 6:39 am

“RUN AWAY!!”

MarkW
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
December 13, 2021 7:39 am

I wish he would.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
December 13, 2021 11:08 am

His dogmatism is very tiresome!

Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 7:19 am

Anything that does not suit me defies reason and probability.

In fact, tornadoes are caused by wind turbines. They introduce vorticity in a mostly laminar flow of air. How about this scientific explanation?

MarkW
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 7:34 am

The only thing extreme about this event is that it happened to hit a populated area.
There are tornadoes every year, and since most of the planet is not heavily populated, there are usually few to no deaths, so nobody hears about them.

I see griff is still trying to peddle the notion that the world is only allowed one extreme event per year.

Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 8:12 am

If you really believe that a degree of warming is the root cause of an unusual, yet not unprecedented tornado, then the root cause of your ignorance is that you’re too easily manipulated by fake emotional arguments. The benefit of mankinds massive cerebral cortex is to be able to override primitive emotional responses with logic and reason. I suggest you give it a try.

Editor
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 8:35 am

Did you read what Dr. Spenser wrote or that this storm was generated by a strong COLD front?

It doesn’t take a “climate change” to generate them it is a series of separate weather flows that converged in the region.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 12:06 pm
Alba
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 2:40 pm

So there’ll be 5 in the next 6 months, then? And 6 in the 6 months after that, I suppose.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
December 13, 2021 4:14 pm

And if you don’t like me, “I’ll squeam and squeam until I’m thick”!

Alasdair Fairbairn
Reply to  griff
December 14, 2021 6:27 am

Winding us all up again Griff. 🙄
You love doing that and we fall for it and try to treat it seriously; thus cluttering up the comments section.

Gregory Woods
December 13, 2021 1:51 am

What? Government lies?

Disputin
Reply to  Gregory Woods
December 13, 2021 2:59 am

Well! Who’d ‘a thunk it!

Joseph Zorzin
December 13, 2021 2:53 am

everything is more intense when the climate is warming. Everything.”

How about orgasms?

MarkW
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
December 13, 2021 7:39 am

Now that is something to look forward to.

fretslider
December 13, 2021 3:20 am

Look, one minute Biden can’t put a coherent thought together or gets lost in the White house grounds, and then suddenly he’s sharp and kicking bottom.

I don’t believe that.

“Joe Biden Spins Tornado Misinformation”

Biden is spoon fed. He can’t even meet royalty without attempting to soil himself.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  fretslider
December 13, 2021 6:46 am

He forgot to hang a Christmas sock on the mantle for Hunter’s love-child.

December 13, 2021 4:07 am

As Gregory Wrightstone points out, and NOAA used to point out, small/weak tornados are easily overlooked, so the count goes up as doppler radars are deployed or improved, or as the number of observers goes up. But large/strong tornadoes are hard to miss, so their historical numbers are not distorted like that.

However, NOAA still does have an (out of date) graph of EF3 – EF5 (severe) tornadoes on their site, if you know where to look:
comment image

Here’s a graph from a report by Michigan meteorologist Bill Steffen about the decline in severe tornadoes:
comment image

Unfortunately, I fear that President Biden probably doesn’t understand graphs.

The myth that global warming makes storms more intense was popularized by a famous but ridiculous book by James Hansen: Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance to Save Humanity. In his book, Hansen said global warming would heat high latitude oceans less than low latitudes, which would cause stronger storms.

If that sentence didn’t startle you, read it again. Yes, he really said that! YouTube has a clip of him on Letterman, plugging his book and making that claim, at 7:25:

He said:

“In the book I talk about what’s going to happen as Greenland and Antarctica begin to melt faster. Because they’re going to keep the high latitude oceans cool, the icebergs will, while low latitudes continue to warm. That increasing temperature gradient is going to drive stronger storms, stronger cyclonic, frontal storms. And, combined with rising sea-level, that is a disaster for coastal cities….”

That’s the exact opposite of the truth.

Astonishingly, it appears that Hansen had never heard of “Arctic Amplification.” That term is climate catastrophists’ way of trying to put a negative spin on a wonderful truth: that “global warming” is not really very global, because it mostly makes brutal winters at frigid high latitudes slightly milder, and short growing seasons slightly longer, and it has little effect on the tropics. (That’s nice, because the tropics are warm enough already.)

Contrary to what Hansen said, global warming heats high latitudes MORE than low latitudes. So, by his logic, the decreasing temperature gradient should result in weaker, not stronger, storms.

There is some evidence that that is happening, though I hesitate to call it a robust trend. Here’s a paper:

Lin & Chan (2015), Recent decrease in typhoon destructive potential and global warming implications. Nature Communications, 6, 7182. doi:10.1038/ncomms8182

An odd thing about James Hansen is that, although he’s always wrong, and usually spectacularly so, and he never admits it, he’s nevertheless one of the few prominent climate alarmists who was not implicated in the corruption revealed by the Climategate emails.

Last edited 9 months ago by Dave Burton
Reply to  Dave Burton
December 13, 2021 7:32 am

You have discovered Joe Biden’s favorite scientific book.

Reply to  Dave Burton
December 13, 2021 9:38 am

I’m not a meteorologist, but can someone explain to me what “cyclonic, frontal storms” means? That sounds like an oxymoron.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dave Burton
December 13, 2021 2:40 pm

““In the book I [Hansen] talk about what’s going to happen as Greenland and Antarctica begin to melt faster.”

So we don’t have anything to worry about until Greenland and Antarctica start melting, it seems.

When will this melting start, Mr. Hansen?

I think Stephen McIntyre has worked over Hansen’s data manipulation of the instrument temperature record pretty good. Hansen is just like Michael Mann and Phil Jones. They are all distorting the past, historic temperature record for political/personal gain.

They are all lying to the people of the world, and costing them Trillions of dollars in the process.

Hansen said 1934 was the hottest year in the United States, now he says it’s not. But all the written records put the lie to Hansen’s claim.

These three guys are instrumental in the promotion of the Human-caused Climate Change hoax. They all should be held accountable for their lies and deceptions.

Olen
December 13, 2021 5:02 am

Things are more intense. Prices are going up on almost everything and items are becoming scarce, hardly the result of climate change. If the climate is changing, as they define it, wouldn’t people notice the same way changes are noticed. People would say, that’s different.

Too much scare tactics and too little interest on real problems.

Alba
Reply to  Olen
December 13, 2021 6:35 am

Maybe we need an Index of Climate Change to match the Index of Consumer Prices. How should such an index be calculated? Perhaps, more to the point, who could be trusted to produce a reliable index?

Dave Fair
Reply to  Alba
December 13, 2021 10:16 am

We have many indexes of climate change. They are called unaltered historical records. Yeah, I know: Cherry picking leads to official lies.

MarkW
Reply to  Olen
December 13, 2021 7:41 am

In a sense, much of the scarcity has been caused by climate change.
The rules being put into effect by the climate warriors is making it harder and harder for the economy to function efficiently.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Olen
December 13, 2021 2:46 pm

“If the climate is changing, as they define it, wouldn’t people notice the same way changes are noticed. People would say, that’s different.”

People would notice if things were drastically different. They are not drastically different and that’s why most people don’t worry about the weather beyond making sure they have their umbrella if it rains.

The Alarmists wonder why nobody cares about Human-caused Climate Change in the polls and the reason is people don’t see changes in their local climates, so they wonder what the hell the alarmists are talking about.

Bruce Cobb
December 13, 2021 6:20 am

“Everything is more intense”. Yes, especially the lying, screaming, and crying by the Chicken-Little Climate Catastrophe Caterwaulers.

Slowroll
December 13, 2021 8:50 am

“We all know that global warming causes more severe weather events…” sayeth the sage Brandon. If warming is global, wouldn’t it reduce severe weather, since storms are caused by temperature and pressure differentials?

yirgach
December 13, 2021 8:57 am

Another fine example of Mass Formation Psychosis. Read article by Dr. Malone talking about the phenomena reported by Dr. Mattias Desmet.
From the article:

The conditions to set up mass formation psychosis include lack of social connectedness and sensemaking as well as large amounts of latent anxiety and passive aggression. When people are inundated with a narrative that presents a plausible “object of anxiety” and strategy for coping with it, then many individuals group together to battle the object with a collective singlemindedness. This allows people to stop focusing on their own problems, avoiding personal mental anguish. Instead, they focus all their thought and energy on this new object.
As mass formation progresses, the group becomes increasingly bonded and connected. Their field of attention is narrowed and they become unable to consider alternative points of view. Leaders of the movement are revered, unable to do no wrong.

Reply to  yirgach
December 13, 2021 9:28 am

The closing phrase is delightfully autological: “…unable to do no wrong.

Last edited 9 months ago by Dave Burton
ResourceGuy
December 13, 2021 9:55 am

So hit them with a gas tax and a passthrough methane tax during their years to recover. That is the spin gift to workers and families…for the cause.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  ResourceGuy
December 13, 2021 11:21 am

Apparently that is in play with Biden’s massive spending bill.

ResourceGuy
December 13, 2021 9:58 am

The Parrot in Chief has spoken.

December 13, 2021 10:28 am

Some things really are becoming more “intense,” in a warming, higher-CO2 world.

Intensive agriculture is becoming more intense, meaning that crop yields are rising (which reduces the amount of land needed for agriculture):
comment image

Much of that improvement is due to factors other than CO2 & warming, but if we didn’t have the approximately 20% improvement in agricultural yields attributable to elevated CO2 we could make up for the lost crop production by putting additional land under the plow. Converting all the world’s rainforests to agriculture would nearly suffice.
 ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍

Greening of the earth is likewise becoming :more intense.” NASA measures the trend from satellites; here’s their video about it:


 ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍

De-desertification is likewise becoming more intense. National Geographic has “disappeared” their article about it, but I kept a copy of it:

https://sealevel.info/Owen2009_Sahara_Desert_Greening-NatGeo30639457.html

Excerpt:

“Vast swaths of North Africa are getting noticeably lusher due to warming temperatures, new satellite images show, suggesting a possible boon for people living in the driest part of the continent.”

comment image

New Scientist still has an old article about it on their site:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2811-africas-deserts-are-in-spectacular-retreat/

Excerpt:

The southern Saharan desert is in retreat, making farming viable again in what were some of the most arid parts of Africa.

…dunes are retreating right across the Sahel region on the southern edge of the Sahara desert. Vegetation is ousting sand across a swathe of land stretching from Mauritania on the shores of the Atlantic to Eritrea 6000 kilometres away on the Red Sea coast.

Nor is it just a short-term trend. Analysts say the gradual greening has been happening since the mid-1980s, though has gone largely unnoticed.

comment image
 ‍‍‍‍‍‍ ‍‍

However, not everything is becoming more “intense.” Like tornadoes, famines are becoming much less intense.
comment image
comment image

Like me, President Biden and his family are blessed by not needing to worry about getting enough to eat every day. Perhaps if he weren’t so fortunate he would care a little more about the people who would face starvation in a low-carbon world.

Last edited 9 months ago by Dave Burton
Tom Abbott
Reply to  Dave Burton
December 13, 2021 2:56 pm

National Geographic: “Vast swaths of North Africa are getting noticeably lusher due to warming temperatures, new satellite images show,”

Oh, so the temperatures in North Africa were not hot enough before now for greening to take place? That’s the claim?

How about increased CO2 as being the cause of the greening, not warming temperatures? Yes, I know you equate CO2 with warming, but it does not compute as much as you think it does.

The global temperatures are currently cooling. They are down 0.6C from the highpoint in 2016. So does this cooling mean less greening in North Africa? Apparently not, because the greening has not diminished even though the temperatures have cooled.

So, the greening of North Africa has nothing to do with warming temperatures.

Alarmists are fixated on warming even though it is not currently warming. The warming “trend” will only sustain them so far, and it’s getting close to that zero point.

Last edited 9 months ago by Tom Abbott
John Phillips
December 13, 2021 10:43 am

Geoffrey Wrighthouse accuses Joe Biden of spreading misinformation about the recent Tornadoes, specifically writing
 
” Speaking less than 24 hours after the devastation of communities and lives, Biden linked the storms to man-made climate change.” and providing a quote from a press call.
 
Ironically it is Geoffrey who is spreading misinformation, he has carefully edited the quote, I’ve restored the excised text between the [ ].
 
“All I know is that the intensity of the weather across the board has some impacts as a consequence of the warming of the planet and climate change [the specific impact, on these specific storms, I can’t say at this point, I’ll be asking the EPA to look into that] ,” Biden said. “The fact is that we all know everything is more intense when the climate is warming. Everything. And obviously it has some impact here”.
 
Biden specifically said he could not link the tornadoes to climate change – that is, he did NOT do what Wrighthouse said.
 
The Biden video is here, the quote is from around 0.40.
 
https://www.facebook.com/cgtnamerica/videos/988691248380672

peter dimopoulos
December 13, 2021 1:59 pm

Please pray for Perfect Climate……like we had in the past…..

Doonman
December 13, 2021 2:07 pm

Once again, Joe Biden claims that unusually cold weather causes effects attributed to global warming.

He is very sincere about this.

Using Joe Biden’s logical prowess, am now certain that running for political office causes plagiarism and senility causes old age.

I am very sincere about this.

Nick Palmer
December 13, 2021 4:16 pm

And yet the people in Mayfield kinda noticed a difference…

Truthseeker
December 14, 2021 6:14 am

Since we can now predict temps 30 years from now, can somebody tell how hot it will be next Wednesday at my lake house? I need to do some painting. Thanks

%d bloggers like this: