Grist writers are getting increasingly desperate, which makes them more fun.
What if a hurricane even nastier than Katrina — made stronger by the warmer climate — were to barrel through Florida and leave a trail of destruction in its path?
That would be called Hurricane Andrew in 1992.
What if the American Southwest were to transform into an arid, drought-laden scorching-hot Dust Bowl and give rise to major water crises and suffering for millions?
That would be called the Dust Bowl, eighty years ago.
What if floods of biblical proportions were to devastate a major metropolis?
That would be Noah, but let’s try to keep religion out the discussion.
Well, the way some in the green community see it, such disasters would be truly terrible — truly, truly terrible, they stress — but they might be necessary to wake the public up to the threats posed by climate change.
Hoping for disaster shows everyone that your side is mentally ill.
Does this idea — that it will take a massive, climate change-related disaster to get Americans to believe in global warming — have any merit?
Like I said, you need psychiatric help.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/05/climate-disasters-global-warming-real.php
Entertaining commentary. 🙂
It would help, of course, if there were any actual, factual, reality based, warming.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1997.67/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1997.67/trend
And then, of course, there’s this……
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1997.67/plot/rss/from:1997.67/trend
Yeh…. these nut jobs need to check the world. Sadly, I expect some warming after La Nina dissipates. It will feed the frenzy. I was hopeful that extra-decadal data would show people how far off they were about CO2……… it didn’t happen.
Help!!!!!! I’m being moderated!!!!
I put on two links……….
Hurricane Donna in 1960 was also a major storm to hit Florida. It covered most of the peninsula, whereas Andrew only hit the southern tip.
Does this idea — that it will take a massive, climate change-related disaster to get Americans to believe in global warming — have any merit?
Of course not. The disaster, in and of itself, is not proof. They must provide evidence of causation first. Something they have clearly not done IMHO.
MrC