James Taylor
Forbes 8:05 a.m. CDT, October 29, 2013
One year ago today Hurricane Sandy made landfall in New Jersey, killing more than 100 people and causing more than $50 billion in damage. Global warming activists and their media allies will spin the anniversary as a wake-up call to impose costly economic restrictions in the name of combating global warming. In reality, we should thank global warming for making hurricanes less frequent and less severe. Indeed, Hurricane Sandy may well have been much more deadly in the absence of global warming.
Beyond the general hurricane trends, it is quite possible global warming had a very direct, beneficial impact on Hurricane Sandy. Scientists have documented that global warming has increased upper-atmospheric wind shear, which rips apart hurricanes before they can grow to major hurricanes. Without the global warming-induced increase in wind shear, Hurricane Sandy may well have grown to a more powerful hurricane with stronger winds and more substantial storm surge.
For global warming activists, uninformed media pundits and the weak of mind, Hurricane Sandy may well provide a convenient opportunity to sell a fictitious global warming hurricane crisis. For the rest of us, we should thank global warming for its beneficial impacts on hurricanes that save countless lives with each passing year.
Thank Global Warming For Softening The Blow Of Hurricane Sandy – chicagotribune.com
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- The Climate Of 1923
- Market Volatility
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
- Walz’s For Trump
- 6,000 Year Old Tree In The Austrian Alps
- Gemini Can See The Future
- Clinton To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Climate Intelligence Means “Making Things Up”
- Comedy From The BBC
- The Climate Afterlife
- Rewriting The Northern Hemisphere
- Useful Graphs From ChatGPT
- Fort Lauderdale Drowning
- Sinking Of The Titanic
- Expert Arctic Forecasting
- Sinking Of The Titanic
- Nobel Prize Winning Forecast
- Changing Climate
- Gen Z Math And Solutions
- Orwellian NASA Maps
- Faking US Temperature Data
Recent Comments
- arn on Market Volatility
- arn on Gemini Can See The Future
- conrad ziefle on Gemini Can See The Future
- conrad ziefle on “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Bill on Gemini Can See The Future
- conrad ziefle on Market Volatility
- conrad ziefle on Hottest Summer Ever
- stewartpid on Market Volatility
- William on Record CO2 Growth
- Greg in NZ on Hottest Summer Ever
Hurricane Sandy never made landfall. She died at sea.
You might hear some disagreement about that from people who lost their homes.
Steven, I know that you know better, and this is only for the clarification that may be needed for others. Homes were indeed lost, but not to a hurricane.
“In a technical report released on Tuesday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reaffirmed its initial conclusion that Hurricane Sandy was no longer officially a hurricane when it made landfall on Oct. 29 near Brigantine, N.J., just north of Atlantic City. Instead, it was a “post-tropical cyclone” packing hurricane-force winds, the report said.”
Sandy may have diminished below hurricane status, but was still a very large storm at landfall.
Agreed.
Some of my wife’s relatives lost homes from Sandy so it impacted people close to her. The damage was not from high winds so the two homes involved were not total losses but became quite expensive restoration projects and still are not back to pre Sandy status and the owners have not yet been compensated ( if ever ) in spite of political promises.
From what we have learned from the people at ground zero it was the Storm Surge that did the damage: the land fall of the remnant of Sandy with its huge surge coincided with a really high tide. No sea walls protected their area of Long Island so sea water caused the damage not hurricane winds.
Dan Kurt
What’s all this about she?
In Scotland Sandy is a male name, a diminutive of Alexander. The female version is Sandra, Sandie or at a push Sandi
Famous male Sandys
Sandy Lyle – Golf
Sandy Koufax – Baseball
Sandy Jardine – Football (soccer to you)
Sandy Brown – jazz clarinetist
Sandy Calder – American sculptor
Sandy Gall – British broadcaster
Sandy Woodward – British Admiral
Sandy Patch – general of US Army in World War II
I have never personally known a man named Sandy, but have known many females with that name/spelling.
Here are few well known female Sandy’s, some British…
Sandy Chambers, British singer
Sandy Dennis (1937–1992), American actress
Sandy Denny (1947–1978), British singer and songwriter
Sandy Descher, American actress
Sandy Dillon, American singer and songwriter
Sandy Duncan, American singer and actress
Sandy Green, British singer and songwriter
Sandy Johnson (born 1954), American model and actress
Sandy Leah Lima, Brazilian singer-songwriter and actress
Sandy Mölling, German singer
Sandy Powell (costume designer) (born 1960)
Sandy Shaw, an American writer on health
Sandy West, an American musician, drummer of The Runaways
By any chance do these Scottish Sandys wear skirts?
Ah yes, Patch barracks, Stuttgart, Germany, still there too.
Crap, I missed that reference to Patch Barracks! I was there for three of the best years of my life, so many incredible stories and incredible journeys had their origins at Patch, at least for me.
The Rod and Gun Club (where I believe the High School now sits) was a favorite hangout of mine, along with the basement of the Officer’s Club. And I guess the Buffalo is still a mystery. Good ole Patch.
Gator, while you might be technically correct that it wasn’t officially classified as a hurricane when it made landfall, Living on Long Island I can assure you the storm did make landfall and was every bit as bad as a category 1 hurricane. In fact the pressure was still dropping when it came ashore and it was actually lower than when it was a hurricane. 10’s of thousands of trees were felled. While I don’t for a second believe that so called global warming had anything to do with causing the storm, it did do a tremendous amount of damage especially from the flooding because it unfortunetly hit at the top of high tide and a total full moon. God forbid an actual category 2 or 3 hurricane takes the same track and hits the same area at high tide, then, well I don’t even want to even think about it.
When did I say that a massive storm did not hit Long Island? Please do not add words to my comment that are not there.
From your original statement it seemed to me (and probably most people) that you were downplaying the storm with your “died at sea” comment. While we now know what you meant, you could have phrased it differently.
Yes, I could have phrased it with statements to the effect that no storm hit and no homes were lost as has been alleged by others here, but I didn’t. My statement is clear to those who are familiar with the storm, and the English language.
Maybe someone can help with some information for me. Yes, “Hurricane” Sandy was really “Tropical Storm” Sandy when it made landfall. (Actually I was in the area at the time and had a couple days without power.) But isn’t there a clause in some storm insurance policies that mandates a higher deductible if the storm is a “hurricane” rather than a “tropical storm”? Can this be a factor in “Hurricane” Sandy? I seem to remember that a lot of people lost money because “Hurricane Irene”, which was really a tropical storm at landfall, was officially pronounced to be a hurricane.
Sandy was a rare storm, not a “super” one–and one like it was to be expected, sooner or later. New York and New Jersey got fat and lazy, and it caught up with them.
It is important to note that one of the metrics posed to politicians in order to believe that a carbon tax would prevent bad climate, is loss damage. The 50 billion loss is primarily due to the increase in population and growth of wealth on the ocean via inflation of property pricing. When experts in climate analysis normalize data to account for the these factors, there is no correlation between loss damage and climate change. We should not be misled by those on the East Coast that would try to fool us into believing that a tax on carbon will prevent sea level rise or reduce Atlantic Hurricanes.
No climate scientist is willing to state that sea levels will stop rising if we lower CO2 emissions and therein lies the challenge for the 1% who want to be subsidize by you and me so that they can continue to live on the shore at our expense. It is incumbent on the shore dwellers to pay their own way for their risky choice to rebuild on our dollar. The Danes had to build sea walls in the 12th century to keep their land from being devastated by storm surges and being washed away. The East Coast exacerbates its own problem by pumping out fluids from beneath them causing their land to subside into the ocean. In society we should not be enabling poor choices and bad decisions and we certainly shouldn’t be redistributing money from working class people to subsidize the 1% of wealthy shore dwellers on the East Coast. Let the pay for their own poor choices.
No, the losses caused by Sandy is a direct result of year of neglect and an opportunistic view on flood risks.
NYC needs adequate water defenses similar to the dikes and sea defenses that have been build in the Netherlands.
As long as the political establishment refuses to spend a single dime on sea defenses every storm comes with flooding risks.
James Taylor keeps a hoax alive when he confirms non existing global warming.
I call this article counter productive.
Yes, call me a denier, I’m proud of it.
Saving lives? Electric Power Industry preparing for grid collapse November 13th. http://modernsurvivalblog.com/systemic-risk/the-electric-power-industry-is-preparing-for-grid-collapse-on-november-13/#more-30976
In the mean time back door gun control continues: http://modernsurvivalblog.com/government-gone-wild/back-door-gun-control-moves-forward/
They come thru my back door, I’ll give them my gun, but I’ll have to unload it first.
If we let the hacks have it their way:
– no jobs
– no power
– no fuel for our cars
– no guns
– no money
– no health care
– nothing to eat
– no future but death and taxes
The new American Dream according to the Hope and Change Agenda signed off by Obama.
Now how much more arguments do you need to kick this hack out of office?
Since he can’t run for re-election and it is now the end of year #5 out of 8 total it seems awfully silly to go on about kicking the hack out of office. Besides, based on your comments, you will be just as unhappy with Hillary Clinton in the White House as Obama.