The Goreacle

Over at The Goreacle we have another opinion about what Superstorm Sandy means for the future. Not surprisingly Al is warning us to convert to alternative energy ASAP or face dire consequences. But then Al is known for his alarmism. It has made him rich.

Scientists tell us that by continually dumping 90 million tons of global warming pollution into the atmosphere every single day, we are altering the environment in which all storms develop.

No they don’t. They tell us that CO2 has little to no effect on climate. Scientists tell us that low atmospheric CO2 content could be deadly for life. They tell us that CO2 is unrelated to extreme weather events. You won’t hear The Goreacle quoting that study on his Nov 14-15 snoreathon.

As the oceans and atmosphere continue to warm, storms are becoming more energetic and powerful.

No they are not. Severe storms are not increasing. Accumulated Cyclone Energy is below normal for this year.

Other climate-related catastrophes around the world have carried the same message to hundreds of millions.

Not snowstorms or tornadoes or windstorms or hurricanes

What is he talking about? Is he ignorant or deliberately lying? Is he living on the same planet?

As the hurricane approached the East Coast, it gathered strength from abnormally warm coastal waters.

No it didn’t. It went from a Category 1 hurricane to a tropical cyclone. Read the accounts, Al. Can he get anything right? Apparently not. Look at this.

At the same time, Sandy's storm surge was worsened by a century of sea level rise.

The surge was worsened by the high tides at the full moon. Both natural phenomenon last time I was in school. Isn’t the East coast still sinking after the last ice age in isostatic rebound?

Scientists tell us that if we do not reduce our emissions, these problems will only grow worse.

So Al, to what level should we reduce our emissions of CO2?

According to Roger Pielke, Jr.: In historical context, Sandy sits alongside Carol, Diane and Hazel. One big difference however -- Carol, Diane and Hazel hit the US Atlantic coast within a single 13 month period in 1954-1955. Imagine that.

Al seems to think we need to leave the oil, gas and coal in the ground so we don’t burn it and add CO2 to the atmosphere. Is the presumption that this will improve the climate?

Shall we reduce our CO2 levels to that of 1954-55? Would that be far enough into the past?

Should we go back to the levels of CO2 that were present in 1938 when the Long Island Express hurricane rolled through NYC? Lots of fires that year too(185,000). A lot fewer fires in 2012 so far.

Maybe we should reduce our CO2 concentrations to the levels present in 1900 when Galveston was flattened by a devastating hurricane. Lots of forest fires that year too.

Not back far enough? How about 1886 when the US was hit by 7 hurricanes - 2 of them of the major variety? CO2 levels were a lot lower back then. Oil refining was in its infancy.

Tell me again, Al. What year and level of CO2 did you have in mind when the weather was to your liking?

Al ends with this warning.

Hurricane Sandy is a disturbing sign of things to come. We must heed this warning and act quickly to solve the climate crisis. Dirty energy makes dirty weather.

Nonsense. There is no crisis except in Al’s deluded mind. See links above.

Late breaking: more nonsense from Al on the Jennifer Granholm show. Now Al is claiming that hot temperatures "are now 100 times more common than they were just thirty years ago". Did he make that up? Even with all the record hot temperatures experienced in the US in the summer of 2012 no state highs were set. If temperatures are increasing so much how come the State highs are not being broken 100 times more frequently?

Hot air rises, Al. Try as you might even you can’t overheat the planet.

Sandy may have been a Frankenstorm but as usual Al is talking Frankenpoop.