The New Normal (Part 24): Forget everything you know about storms, Sandy is different

Via The Weather Channel:

Via The Weather Channel:

The storm will cover the entire eastern sea-board of the United States and extending into Canada:

“Forget about everything you know about storms that have come up the East coast before…”

Tagged , , , ,

66 thoughts on “The New Normal (Part 24): Forget everything you know about storms, Sandy is different

  1. Eric Worrall says:

    The rats are turning on each other – CRU “disappears” Mann’s hockey stick, claims 10th and 11th century summers were as warm as today.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/10/28/manns-hockey-stick-disappears-and-crus-briffa-helps-make-the-mwp-live-again-by-pointing-out-bias-in-ther-data/

    I wonder if our angering of the storm gods will be the next myth on the chopping block?

    • john byatt says:

      Eric the MWP northern hemisphere has always been recognised as similar to late 20th century temps, this is not a paper on global warming during the MWP

      Now if the actual global temp was as warm as today or warmer then you have a big problem, it means that climate sensitivity is much higher than we anticipate

      shooting yourself in the foot

      • Eric Worrall says:

        No, it means natural variation is capable of producing temperatures similar to today’s, and the argument that current warming is unprecedented is falsified.

      • john byatt says:

        Natural variation was capable of producing the PETM eric,
        seems to bring you comfort

        where is your paper that global temps during the MWP were as warm as today?

    • Nick says:

      Glad you pointed out it was summer temperature being estimated by proxy,Eric. You might also admit that it’s a regional proxy,and cannot be taken as a NH one,let alone global. It also has huge error bars and timing questions,as do many recons.

      Watts is on message with ‘the MWP was disappeared’..that’s been a valuable lie for his purposes. However a lie remains a lie….and that is all Watts has. False propositions, incompetent ‘analyses’ and malicious gossip:WTFIUWT?

      ‘The rats are turning on one another’ That really is a desperate,laughable construction there Eric.

      I’ll tell you one rather good reason why we know current warming is indeed more elevated than the MWP: Otzi the Iceman,whose body and organic artefacts would have rotted away if snow field retreat in a ‘warmer’ or ‘as warm’ MWP had been as extensive and ongoing as what is being witnessed in the Alps,and the world’s other glacier-bearing mountain chains. Otzi is 5300 years old.His body was not in a flowing glacier and was not discharged,it was found in static ice within meters of the Austro-Italian Border on the shoulder of the Fineilspitze at some 3200m elevation. The melting at that elevation has taken the snowfields of the Otztaler [and European] Alps back to the Holocene Optimum.

      You want more? There are many such discoveries involving organic human made articles throughout the Alps over the last decade.

      • Eric Worrall says:

        WTF? Ozzie the iceman, one tiny part of the Alps has melted, and from that you infer the world has is warmer than in the MWP?

        How about the Greenland Viking farms which are still covered in permafrost? Oh sorry, thats regional variation, because it doesn’t support the case for alarmism.

        Here is an excerpt from the Climategate archive which might interest you. It turns out there is a more reliable indicator of arctic temperature than tree rings.

        The Russian specialists who were actually taking the field measurements in Yamal tried to explain this to Briffa – not that the alarmists paid any attention.

        http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=0907975032.txt

        According to reconsructions most favorable conditions for tree growth
        have been marked during 5000-1700 BC. At that time position of tree
        line was far northward of recent one.
        [Unfortunately, region of our research don’t include the whole area
        where trees grew during the Holocene. We can maintain that before 1700
        BC tree line was northward of our research area. We have only 3 dated
        remnants of trees from Yuribey River sampled by our colleagues (70 km
        to the north from recent polar tree line) that grew during 4200-4016
        and 3330-2986 BC.]
        This period is pointed out by low interannual variability of tree
        growth and high trees abundance discontinued, however, by several
        short (50-100 years) unfavorable periods, most significant of them
        dated about 4060-3990 BC. Since about 2800 BC gradual worsening of
        tree growth condition has begun. Significant shift of the polar tree
        line to the south have been fixed between 1700 and 1600 BC.
        At the
        same time interannual tree growth variability increased appreciably.
        During last 3600 years most of reconstructed indices have been varying
        not so very significant. Tree line has been shifting within 3-5 km
        near recent one. Low abundance of trees has been fixed during
        1410-1250 BC and 500-350 BC. Relatively high number of trees has been
        noted during 750-1450 AD.
        There are no evidences of moving polar timberline to the north during
        last century.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        WTF? Yamal, one tiny part of the Siberia was a bit warm hundreds of years, and from that you infer the MWP was warmer globally than now?

      • Nick says:

        Eric,the whole of Eurasia’s glaciers are in sustained retreat, not a tiny f…ing part of the Alps! I don’t INFER anything from Otzi or the Roman and neolithic artifacts ___made of perishable organic matter,leather,fabric,wood__ that have been exposed to the sun for the first time in 2000 to 5000+ years at sites in Austria and Switzerland….

        I OBSERVE their exposure,I OBSERVE the retreat of ice. I OBSERVE that in order for these perishables to have survived until now,they had to be frozen in static icefields and buried away from the elements…which would have rotted them if similar retreats had happened even for a few months AT ANY TIME in the past. As in, not in the MWP,or the RWP.

        I OBSERVE that for ice to melt it needs to be subject to warm temperatures,and for it to retreat- rapidly – from LIA maxima it needs to be exposed to a sustained and rapid warming trend. Such that lifts the average elevation of the accumulation zones of all these glaciers higher and higher.until even fern at 3200m and higher has ablated. The cross on top of the Grossvenediger at 3660m is falling over because the ice cap has shrunk so far even at 12000′ a.s.l, if imperial units are necessary for you.

        Do you understand,Eric?? Sustained regional warming which has removed the last permanent ice in the Sierra Nevada of southern Spain,removed most of the ice in the Pyrenees and doomed the remnants to disappearance in the next decade. Downwasted glaciers throughout the Alps from SE France to central Austria. Shrunk Norwegian ice fields. Shrunk the glaciers of the Caucasus and high Turkey. And etc. In the Alps only the highest part of Mt Blanc is not downwasting.

        Oh and we have organic artifacts from reindeer hunting in Norway that have been frozen under away from the elements since the start of the MWP. Further up the hill are artifacts from 250-500AD,,and the glacier is retreating further. According to Karlen 1988,Norwegian ice was having a minor advance around 940 BP,well and truly within the bounds of the MWP. Norways ice is at the lowest ebb since it reformed over 5000 years ago after the Holocene Optimum. That’s where we are heading AS PREDICTED.

        MWP= Mediocre Warming Period, by observation.

      • john byatt says:

        Eric get effin real

        http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/09/hey-ya-mal/

        your ignorance is profound

        • Eric Worrall says:

          Interesting that you reference Briffa, and his work on tree rings.

          Here is what Briffa had to say in private about Mann’s proxy reconstructions.

          http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=0938018124.txt&search=nice+tidy+story

          I know there is pressure to present a
          >nice tidy story
          as regards ‘apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand
          >years or more in the proxy data’ but in reality the situation is not quite
          >so simple. We don’t have a lot of proxies that come right up to date and
          >those that do (at least a significant number of tree proxies ) some
          >unexpected changes in response that do not match the recent warming. I do
          >not think it wise that this issue be ignored in the chapter.
          > For the record, I do believe that the proxy data do show unusually
          >warm conditions in recent decades. I am not sure that this unusual warming
          >is so clear in the summer responsive data. I believe that the recent warmth
          >was probably matched about 1000 years ago.

          As far as I know Briffa never said any of this in public.

          Mann’s amusing reply to this is also part of this email change – in which he demands Briffa find a way of cleaning up Mann’s mess.

          This email alone is why I believe the most likely source of the Climategate leak is Briffa – they do seem to kick him around a little, and Briffa seems a little more computer literate than most of them.

      • Nick says:

        Firstly, that email exchange was from 1999,before IPCC TAR. 13 years ago. Lots of research water under the bridge since then. The full exchange shows a polite and detailed discussion…don’t know where you get this ‘kicking Keith’ idea. Sounds like motivated reasoning on your behalf. Briffa has ‘said ‘ such stuff in public: in published work.

        If you want to say stuff about Siberian tree lines,broaden the picture and update it. Meta studies have found advances in many sites around the Arctic,but many are static.The fact is that both summer and winter trends are important,and as unintuitive as this may be,some sites have warmed in summer but not in winter. A paper I saw said around 50% of sites were moving up/north,though 70% of the sites showed warming.

  2. john byatt says:

    wunderground is a good place to follow the news on Sandy, comments section from all parts being affected

    wunderground.com

    The US has really started to take notice of the science since their droughts and heatwaves this year,

    Nothing like experience to get the right perspective

    • Eric Worrall says:

      The grumbling will calm as soon as the bad weather goes away.

      At least they don’t blame witches for bad weather anymore. Though blaming denialists is an interesting parallel.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Innocent_VIII

      • john byatt says:

        The grumbling will calm as soon as the bad weather goes away.

        you missed the post title ” The new normal”

        it ain’t going away eric

      • Roy Mustard says:

        As John Houghton once said: “If we want good environmental policy in future, we’ll have to have a disaster.”

        Sad but true. Most people only link climate to weather, which deniers exploit when it’s cold. As weather events grow more extreme public opinion can only swing with it – no matter how many creationist-style tactics deniers try.

        Sad, but true.

  3. john byatt says:

    Sandy is heading northward now

    It has begun

    http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=2279#commenttop

    batten down and take care

  4. Roy Mustard says:

    Good news!

    Despite an intense politically and economically driven war against science, logic and common sense, more Americans are buying into the theory — supported by the vast majority of climate researchers — that the Earth actually, truly is warming.

    According to a a new study called “Climate Change in the American Mind,” 70% of Americans surveyed last month said they believed in global warming, up from 57% in January 2010.

    Meanwhile, global warming deniers in the U.S. are dwindling, down to 12% last month from 20% in January 2010.

    As for Sandy – isn’t this just the kind of extreme, catastrophic weather event deniers have been ridiculing the idea of for years?

    Plus it’s cute that Eric has so much faith in Watts, even though the man has been wrong so many times before. Because if there’s one thing deniers can never have too much of, it’s blind faith in their prophets.

  5. Roy Mustard says:

    Eric, I know your faith drives you to nonsensical babblings but do try and contain yourself.

    • Eric Worrall says:

      Talking of nonsensical babblings, the following hilarious Climategate Email reveals how the phrase “Climate Change” was adopted in place of “global warming”, to cover the possibility that the world might cool.

      http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=4141.txt&search=better+labelling

      I think this is a real problem, and I agree with Nick that climate change
      might be a better labelling than global warming. … In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public relations problem with the media, which can become public perception. It provides a new story for the old news that is climate change – a story that has been running since 1985/88. … I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both global warming and an ice age at the same creates a real public relations
      problem for us. …

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Eric, quoting from your bible won’t make big, bad, threatening-to-your-ideology science go away.

        Climategate fizzled out, the tea party is dead and public opinion is swinging back towards warming. But it’s cute that you cling to your faith, so blind to reality are you.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Also I think it is telling the best you can do is take the quotes out of context and collate them together. You are a fraudulent liar.

        If you had the facts on your side, why would you need to lie?

      • Nick says:

        The IPCC_ the International Panel on CLIMATE CHANGE_ was formed in 1988, Eric….1_9_8_8….and your email was talking about cold weather outbreaks,not global scale cooling…as well as perception problems for the bloody media who are generally as thick as they are arrogant. News Ltd that means you.

        • Eric Worrall says:

          Nick, the email is what it is – a discussion between colleagues and a decision that they should start using the term “Climate Change”, so they wouldn’t lose face if the world cooled.

          Note all the waffle about “we are dealing with complex systems…”.

          Was it the only such discussion, or even the first discussion? Probably not. But it is interesting to lift the lid on these events.

          Climategate will be an invaluable archive to future historians, a far more intimate peek at important historical events than is normally available.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Sorry Eric. I’ll make that clearer as you seem kind of slow:

        You lied.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        “Nick, the email is what it is – a discussion between colleagues and a decision that they should start using the term “Climate Change”, so they wouldn’t lose face if the world cooled.”

        That is a lie. They said no such thing. In fact, you had to remove the context to make it look like they did. This is fraud borne of desperation and intellectual vacuity.

  6. john byatt says:

    More of the same email

    this is obviously a response to the bush admin memo to try to use the term climate change because global warming scares people

    date 2004

    I think this is a real problem, and I agree with Nick that climate change
    might be a better labelling than global warming. But somehow I also feel
    that one needs to add the dimension of the earth system, and the fact that
    human beings for the first time ever are able to impact on that system. That
    is why the IGBP in a recent publication “Global Change and the Earth System”
    underline that we now live in the anthropocene period. Climate change is one
    of the central elements of this process, but not the only one: loss of
    biological diversity, water stress, land degradation with loss of topsoil,
    etc etc all form part of this – and they are all linked in some way or
    another. Therefore a central message probably has to be that humans are now
    interfering with extremely large and heavy global systems, of which we know
    relatively little: we are in a totally new situation for the human species,
    and our impact added to all the natural variations that exist risks to
    unsettle subtle balances and create tensions within the systems which might
    also lead to “flip-over” effects with short-term consequences that might be
    very dangerous.

    And then, the good old precautionary principle must be guiding our effort.
    During the cold war, enormous resources were put into missiles, airplanes,
    and other military equipment to check Soviet expansion and make containment
    policy credible – in the firm hope that all this equipment would never have
    to be used. And it wasn’t, and nobody complained about the costs. Now, in
    the face of a different, but clearly distinguishable global threat “more
    dangerous than terrorism” the cost issue surfaces all the time. Somehow we
    all need to help in creating an understanding that the threat of global
    change is real and that we need to develop a new paradigm of looking at the
    world and the future: this is not just a scientific or technological issue.
    It involves important philosophical and ethical considerations where some
    fundamental value systems have to be challenged.

    • Roy Mustard says:

      Exactly. I’ve been at this site for twenty minutes and Eric fabricates evidence, showing himself to be a slimy, dishonest windbag of no virtue or character. How am I supposed to believe anything he tells me when he lies so readily? Shameful.

  7. john byatt says:

    2003

    the Luntz memo

    he US Republican party is changing tactics on the environment, avoiding “frightening” phrases such as global warming, after a confidential party memo warned that it is the domestic issue on which George Bush is most vulnerable.

    The memo, by the leading Republican consultant Frank Luntz, concedes the party has “lost the environmental communications battle” and urges its politicians to encourage the public in the view that there is no scientific consensus on the dangers of greenhouse gases.

    “The scientific debate is closing [against us] but not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science,” Mr Luntz writes in the memo, obtained by the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based campaigning organisation.

    “Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly.

    “Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.”

    The phrase “global warming” should be abandoned in favour of “climate change”, Mr Luntz says, and the party should describe its policies as “conservationist” instead of “environmentalist”, because “most people” think environmentalists are “extremists” who indulge in “some pretty bizarre behaviour… that turns off many voters”.

    Words such as “common sense” should be used, with pro-business arguments avoided wherever possible.

    • Roy Mustard says:

      The term “climate change” for Co2 induced warming actually dates back to the fifties, so Eric the Liar’s argument is bunk. If he repeats it, he will be lying.

      • Eric Worrall says:

        I suggested the email discusses the “adoption” of the phrase “Climate Change”, not its original expression.

        Clearly the phrase was one the various parties in the email were familiar with.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        No it doesn’t. You are lying.

        • Eric Worrall says:

          What part of “I think this is a real problem, and I agree with Nick that climate change
          might be a better labelling than global warming.” don’t you understand?

          The email clearly includes a conversation about the advisability of adopting the term “Climate Change” in place of “Global Warming”.

          I know the cognitive dissonance of your Climategate denial must be hurting your head, but make an effort to get past this – it will do you good in the long run.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        How about the fake, ficticious, conspiratorial context you fraudulently insist on using it in. Saying “I think x is a better term” is different to calling for mass adoption.

        To insist otherwise is to perpetrate a lie.

        That the best argument you have is to take emails out of context shows how empty and desperate you are.

        • Eric Worrall says:

          I said it “reveals how it was adopted”, not that this email was the minutes of a SPECTRE like conspiracy driving forward the new policy.

          Obviously this discussion was not the only one along similar lines, because Climate Change supplanted Global Warming in media and press releases.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        “Obviously this discussion was not the only one along similar lines, because Climate Change supplanted Global Warming in media and press releases.”

        Another lie. Climate change has dwarfed global since the 70’s. It’s the IPCC, not the IPGW.

        I know you don’t like facts that don’t fit your conspiracy so you make them up. It’s whatever sounds good with your frauds.

        http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming.htm

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Yes you did. You fraudulently conflated it to take it out of context and ignore the deeper meaning.

        That is shameful behavour, but all I expect of you.

        • Eric Worrall says:

          I abstracted the interesting parts, and provided the reference to the original for more complete context.

          If I was trying to lie about it, why would I provide a reference to the original? IMO the email itself, in its entirety, supports my point.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Good to see you admit to quote mining, which is just what you admitted. Have you no shame, or does dishonesty come naturally?

        Why give the link? Presumably because you think I am like you and don’t read primary sources.

    • Roy Mustard says:

      It also overlooks the fact “climate change” was in mass usage by 2004 having been coined in the 50’s.

      Why do you continue to lie? Why is your mind so rotten that you insist on snivelling around the dregs of emails long abandoned by other deniers?

      Eric, deniers like you are a gift to us. Your extremity is turning off the common man who, only having lived through the worst drought in fifty years, now has a hurricane to contend with.

      I have laid turds with more integrity than you.

      • Eric Worrall says:

        Have your little moment of hope, that people will somehow start to care again about Climate Change, that important people might start attending climate conferences again.

        its going to be all the more piquant when that hope is dashed.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        I have science on my side Eric.

        You have lies.

        I’ve said it before – if you were right, you wouldn’t need dishonestly. You lie because you have nothing

        • Eric Worrall says:

          Your denial of what is written in black and white in front of your is growing tiresome.

          The email included an agreement between colleagues that “climate change is better labelling than global warming” because of PR issues.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        You accusing me of denial? Hilarious.

        Repeating lies doesn’t make them true. I know on WUWT it does, but not in reality.

  8. john byatt says:

    Roy

    other sites that have been following eric cannot believe that he is real

    must be a poe.

    no he is real alright,

    .

    • john byatt says:

      A Poe or a complete moron?

      you be the judge

      Eric Worrall says:
      October 29, 2012 at 10:20 am
      Switzerland is a high energy consumption densely populated country. I’m not surprised some of their ice is melting.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        “not surprised some of their ice is melting” really means “I can’t find any reason to deny it, no matter how much I google”

        His reasoning is ludicrous. Eric is a space cadet when it comes to logic. This is the kind of reasoning you might expect from a talking cat.

  9. john byatt says:

    sandy is getting close to a cat 2

    that is cat 2 hurricane not cyclone

    equivalent to a severe cat 3 cyclone

  10. Roy Mustard says:

    Bad news John, but didn’t North Carolina legislate against this kind of event? It can’t possibly happen!

    • john byatt says:

      yes and so did Victoria and nsw”

      sent a letter off today, a reply to a sceptic, that the QLD government will probably plan to adapt to a drop in sea levels over the coming ninety years due to getting their advice from richard pearson famous for his fish box and glad wrap rebuttal of the greenhouse effect,

      • Eric Worrall says:

        Perhaps Queensland skeptic Bob Carter is finally making some headway against the alarmists.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Carter’s been a pariah since he was busted accepting money from Heartland while claiming to receive no funding.

        Meanwhile NC tried to legislate against flooding caused by events like Sandy. I know this is embarrassing for your alarmist conspiracy cause Eric.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Now you are a hypocrite and a liar. Spreading hacked emails while admonishing Gleick. A shameless, disgraceful liar and a hypocrite to boot.

        And still unable to discuss the topic of this thread! I thought AGW was supposed to be beneficial? All it seems to do is worsen extremes.

        Eric, you are so low you feed on bottom feeders.

        • Eric Worrall says:

          We don’t know the Climategate emails were hacked – it could easily have been a whistleblower, possibly one of the underlings like Briffa got kicked once too often (though I have no proof it was Briffa – just my personal speculation).

          We do know Gleick, while serving as AGU Chairman of the Ethics Committee, committed identity fraud to steal documents from Heartland. That was clearly a crime.

      • Roy Mustard says:

        Yes, actually we know the servers were hacked from North America. Of course you ignore this because it doesn’t fit in with your slovenly conspiracy theory.

        To suggest anything else is a lie, which you seem to tell many of.

    • Roy Mustard says:

      I know this because I far better read on this subject than conspiracy theorists like yourself. A leak? Is it still 2010? I didn’t realise people believed those conspiracries still, oh hey it’s Eric Worrall.

      Maybe you aren’t lying. Maybe you really are this stupid.

      Which is it?

  11. Romney wants to kill FEMA, the american national response to local state disasters. What is the point of a federation like america, canada or australia if in times of regional crisis the unaffected states can’t send in aid ? Next year, after all, it might be their term for a disaster.

    His CNN video tape from june 2011 could cost the GOP this election….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: