Sections

Services

Information

UK United Kingdom

Hurricane Sandy mixes super-storm conditions with climate change

As I write this, Hurricane Sandy remains a very large, powerful hurricane. On Sunday afternoon (local time), Sandy brought winds gusting to 103km/h to coastal North Carolina. Heavy rains are already occurring…

Residents of Virginia have begun sandbagging against the arrival of Sandy. EPA/MIchael Reynolds

As I write this, Hurricane Sandy remains a very large, powerful hurricane. On Sunday afternoon (local time), Sandy brought winds gusting to 103km/h to coastal North Carolina. Heavy rains are already occurring from North Carolina to New Jersey with amounts recorded of 4cm so far.

But Sandy is predicted to turn left and move ashore on the Atlantic coast somewhat south of New York and north of Washington DC in a day or so. Rainfalls exceeding 15cm are likely in some areas, but a major risk is from the coastal storm surge on top of very high sea levels made higher by climate change.

A large easterly wind fetch has already piled waters up along the coast, and with high tide and the storm surge, and storm force winds extending a huge 800km plus from the center, the potential for the ocean surges to be over 3m is very real in the New York City area.

The sea surface temperatures along the Atlantic coast have been running at over 3C above normal for a region extending 800km off shore all the way from Florida to Canada. Global warming contributes 0.6C to this. With every degree C, the water holding of the atmosphere goes up 7%, and the moisture provides fuel for the tropical storm, increases its intensity, and magnifies the rainfall by double that amount compared with normal conditions.

Global climate change has contributed to the higher sea surface and ocean temperatures, and a warmer and moister atmosphere, and its effects are in the range of 5 to 10%. Natural variability and weather has provided the perhaps optimal conditions of a hurricane running into extra-tropical conditions to make for a huge intense storm, enhanced by global warming influences.

My daughter lives in a ground level apartment in Hoboken New Jersey, a few hundred meters from the Hudson River, near Manhattan, New York City, in a region where the largest storm surge is predicted. My wife happens to be visiting with her and her family at the moment and as I write this, they are evacuating. They have taken many precautions including especially removing leaves (since it is autumn) from drains and sandbagging certain areas, but risk of flooding and backed up sewage and drains is high. Better safe than sorry.

Articles also by This Author

Sign in to Favourite

Join the conversation

81 Comments sorted by

Comments on this article are now closed.

  1. Stewart Franks

    Professor School of Engineering at University of Newcastle

    Sandy is a Hurricane occuring towards the end of the typical season, during ENSO-like conditions. There is nothing to suggest anthropogenic climate change has had any meaningful influence on its occurrence or development.

    It is the low-grade speculative finger-pointing at these individual extreme events that diminishes any argument of concern over the role of CO2 in weather and climate

    report
    1. Stewart Franks

      Professor School of Engineering at University of Newcastle

      In reply to Christian Slattery

      Dear Christian - How much worse because of CO2? This is not quantified, consequently any claim of a significant role is speculative. Speculation is not science. The danger is that we all will misunderstand the role of CC if it is so readily and speculatively blamed.

      report
    2. David Arthur

      resistance gnome

      In reply to Stewart Franks

      Thanks for the critical thinking Professor Franks.

      I understand Hurricane Sandy to be a Category 1 possibly Category 2 storm - not overly severe as hurricanes go, perhaps (the Innisfail area has had a couple of Category 5 storms over the last few years, so that the issue is one of the standards to which built infrastructure in the Hurricane's path is constructed.

      It's also around full moon, so high tides will exacerbate storm surges.

      As it happens, the US East Coast is expected to experience…

      Read more
    3. Peter Best

      Computer Programmer

      In reply to Stewart Franks

      Are you the same Stewart Franks who says

      "The scientists made really classic errors - they actually confused the physics, they got the physics wrong. "

      Do you really believe that?

      report
    4. Peter Best

      Computer Programmer

      In reply to Stewart Franks

      Did you also say

      ": "[The IPCC] It is actually run by a very small group of about six to eight leading members of the IPCC who all agree that scaring people about climate change is very good for their careers.""

      report
    5. In reply to Peter Best

      Comment removed by moderator.

    6. Arkadiusz Semczyszak

      adviser

      In reply to Kevin Trenberth

      You should be aware that there is another possibility to influence warming on storms:
      “The Impact of Climate Change on Natural Disasters” (http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/RisingCost/rising_cost5.php): “As a result, global warming may cause the temperature difference between the poles and the equator to decrease. And as the difference decreases, so should the number of storms, says George Tselioudis, a research scientist at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and Columbia University…

      Read more
    7. Glenn Tamblyn

      Mechanical Engineer, Director

      In reply to Arkadiusz Semczyszak

      Arkadiusz

      My guess is that Kevin is already familiar with that.

      An interesting area of research that has been emerging in the last few years is the relationship between a warming Arctic and the Polar Jet Stream. It's still developing science, but it is starting to look like the greater warming in the Arctic is causing the northern Polar Jet Stream to slow, by around 15% so far.

      The energy source that drives the Jet Stream is the the temperature difference between the tropics and the poles…

      Read more
    8. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to Stewart Franks

      It's quantified in the second paragraph of this story. Did you read it?

      report
    9. David Arthur

      resistance gnome

      In reply to Kevin Trenberth

      Thanks for this clarification; I was under the misunderstanding that cyclone severity can invariably be classed by what is called "Category".

      I wasn't downplaying the impact of this event: my remarks in response to Prof Franks were intended to direct him to the meteorological context of this cyclone (the polar storm with which it is interacting), and point out that the likelihood of such storms is greatly exacerbated by climate change.

      report
    10. Stewart Franks

      Professor School of Engineering at University of Newcastle

      In reply to Kevin Trenberth

      Dear Kevin

      Could I ask what specific research are you referring to?

      There is certainly nothing specific to Sandy in the literature. No doubt the causal factors behind Sandy will be assessed, however it is certainly wrong to a priori claim 'climate change'.

      This is only low-grade fingerpointing, not credible authoritative science

      report
    11. Mike Swinbourne

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to Stewart Franks

      Really Stewart? You are telling James Hansen that he does not know what he is talking about on this issue?

      Does the word 'arrogant' mean anything to you? I could, with equal credibility, state that you do not know what you are talking about on the subject of engineering. And I wonder how you would react if I did so.

      How about you stick to your subject, act with a modicum of scientific integrity, and listen to the advice of someone who is one of the world's preeminent experts on this one.

      I am not suggesting that you bow to authority - but how about you do some actual research and search the literature as was suggested, It's not hard you know:
      http://www.westfield.ma.edu/uploads/cbraun/trenberth2012.pdf

      report
    12. Spiro Vlachos

      AL

      In reply to Kevin Trenberth

      Kevin, and what about the polar bears?

      report
    13. Spiro Vlachos

      AL

      In reply to Kevin Trenberth

      Kevin Trenberth, when you can convince governments to give up their everyday responsibilities and listen to you and act on false predictions and forecasts, then I will know the world has gone mad.

      report
    14. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to Spiro Vlachos

      What _about_ the polar bears?

      report
    15. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to Christian Slattery

      I think the conclusions of the IPCC investigation of severe weather a couple of years ago was that there was no evidence either way. Some seemed to indicate that warming may reduce severity and frequency, which are of course linked, since if there are likely to be more, it is axiomatic that there will be more severe storms some of which will be very severe.

      However, the physics of the global warming as explained by climatologists, is that the temperature of the earth will become more uniform with the greatest rises in T being in cooler regions. This will reduce the temperature differences or gradients which are what cause severe events - uniform increases or decreases in temperature will not in themselves lead to more frequent or more catastrophic storms.

      report
    16. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Mike Swinbourne

      Stewart is correct

      Trenberth fails to cite any material and seems to think that the peer-review process is squeaky clean when obviously it's not.

      Just witness the Gergis et al paper that reviewers thought was okay but when released to the blogosphere major faults were identified within days and the paper hastily withdrawn.

      Witness also the 1995 "humans caused it" paper written by a several IPCC authors of the "attribution" chapter of the 1995 IPCC report. It wasn't even submitted when cited…

      Read more
  2. Marc Hendrickx

    Geologist: The Con is a bad Monty Python sketch, for climate sense see: http://www.thegwpf.org/

    You call that a Hauuricane?

    "Hurricane Hazel was the deadliest and costliest hurricane of the 1954 Atlantic hurricane season. The storm killed as many as 1,000 people in Haiti before striking the United States near the border between North and South Carolina, as a Category 4 hurricane. After causing 95 fatalities in the US, Hazel struck Canada as an extratropical storm, raising the death toll by 81 people, mostly in Toronto. As a result of the high death toll and the damage Hazel caused, its name was retired from use for North Atlantic hurricanes."

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

    report
    1. Marc Hendrickx

      Geologist: The Con is a bad Monty Python sketch, for climate sense see: http://www.thegwpf.org/

      In reply to Christian Slattery

      The point being that once again someone has confused the weather for climate.

      report
    2. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

      In reply to Marc Hendrickx

      But changing climate changes the weather.

      And the number and severity of extreme weather events is looking more and more likely to be linked to climate change.

      Just because there was a big hurricane in the past doesn't say anything about the threat of more extreme weather due to climate change.

      report
    3. Tim Scanlon

      Debunker

      In reply to Marc Hendrickx

      Not when you read the article correctly and see the data stated about the changes to warmer oceans than normal.

      But of course, you are still trying to obfuscate the issue of climate change.

      report
    4. Marc Hendrickx

      Geologist: The Con is a bad Monty Python sketch, for climate sense see: http://www.thegwpf.org/

      In reply to Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      And the long term trend of tropical storms is?

      report
    5. Marc Hendrickx

      Geologist: The Con is a bad Monty Python sketch, for climate sense see: http://www.thegwpf.org/

      In reply to Account Deleted

      A non peer reviewed article from a an insurance company, want to buy a bridge?

      report
    6. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

      In reply to Marc Hendrickx

      So reports from insurance companies need to be peer reviewed, but when it comes to climate science the deniers reject the thousands of papers supporting climate change what have been peer reviewed.

      I suspect that Marc Hendrickx is only here to wave the deniers flag and disrupt any sensible conversation.

      report
    7. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to Marc Hendrickx

      Why don't you loan me the money to buy it? We can secure the loan against the title deeds.

      report
  3. Brent Hoare

    logged in via Facebook

    One of the best articles I've seen teasing out the linkages between Hurricane Sandy and climate change is by David Spratt at http://www.climatecodered.org/2012/10/connecting-dots-between-frankenstorm.html

    While rising atmospheric and sea surface temperatures are undoubtedly contributing to the size, energy and water vapour content of Hurricane Sandy, the other influences that need to be understood are both related to rising temperatures in the Arctic region, evidenced by the unprecedented level…

    Read more
    1. John Coochey

      Mr

      In reply to Brent Hoare

      But I thought even Mann of the Hockey stick, who claims a Nobel prize, has admitted that temperatures have not increased for sixteen years or are people re writing history?

      report
    2. Nick Kermode

      logged in via email @hotmail.com

      In reply to Tim Scanlon

      Not only even that, He has so little idea what he is talking about he labelled a very very basic graph showing temp anomaly in degrees C on the y axis, as being in tenths of a degree. School kid stuff!

      report
  4. John McLean

    logged in via email @connexus.net.au

    Things don't look good. Trenberth claims on his web page that he's a Nobel Laureate when he's not; the prize was awarded to the IPCC. Trenbert says that the sea surface temperatures along the Atlantic coast have been running at over 3C above normal for a region extending 800km off shore all the way from Florida to Canada. Maybe they have for a week or so but according to NOAA the September temperatures ranged from matching the 1971-2000 averages along Florida's coast, a brief stretch of North Caolina…

    Read more
    1. Lennert Veerman
      Lennert Veerman is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Senior Research Fellow, School of Population Health at University of Queensland

      In reply to John McLean

      Just looked up prof Trenberth's website (http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html). It says: "shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize which went to the IPCC. "

      He must have read your comment and quickly changed it. How canny.

      The IPCC report on extreme weather did not say there was "no credible reason to blame human activity".

      It did include the following passage: "There is evidence that some extremes have changed as a result of anthropogenic influences, including increases in atmospheric concentrations…

      Read more
    2. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Lennert Veerman

      Trenberth's CV, at http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/trenberth-cv.html says

      "Nobel Laureate (shared) for Nobel Peace Prize 2007 (as part of IPCC)". This statement is false. Trenberth is not a Nobel Laureate. He was not awarded the prize, the IPCC was. The most he can legitimately say is along the lines of "Part of the Nobel Peace Prize winning IPCC."

      report
    3. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      Two thoughts:

      1 - Based on the 50-year link between average global temperature and the SOI of 7 months earlier, the prediction was entirely reasonable. The interesting question is what happened to weaken that relationship.

      2 - Do you similarly gloat over Flannery's failed predictions or the repeated failures of climate models? Given that both have made many predictions and have an appalling track record you should be even more gleeful than you are about mysingle prediction.

      report
    4. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

      In reply to John McLean

      I've been trying to track down Flannery's so called prediction failure.

      All I've found so far is Flannery saying the climate change will lead to more extremes - more floods and more droughts.

      So please provide some evidence that Flannery has failed.

      And if you do prove that Flannery said something wrong, what relevance does this have to the truth or otherwise of climate change?

      report
    5. Kevin Trenberth

      Distinguished Senior Scientist at National Center for Atmospheric Research

      In reply to John McLean

      To me: from IPCC Chair Rajendra Pachauri after the award of the Nobel Peace Prize, in a note to IPCC report authors:

      " I have been stunned in a pleasant way with the news of the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for the IPCC. This makes each of you a Nobel Laureate and it is my privilege to acknowledge this honour on your behalf.... The fact that the IPCC has earned the recognition that this award embodies, is really a tribute to your knowledge, hard work and application."

      report
    6. Glenn Tamblyn

      Mechanical Engineer, Director

      In reply to John McLean

      John

      "Based on the 50-year link between average global temperature and the SOI of 7 months earlier, the prediction was entirely reasonable"

      What link John? Your one and only paper on this subject didn't show any such link, even though you, Bob Carter & Chris DeFreitas try to claim that it did. You showed a link between SOI and temp's months later,but no link between SOI and longer term temperature trends - lots of people pointed out the flaw in the conclusion you 3 jumped to at the time.

      And what was the direction of the link John. We have just come out of 2 years of La Nina and the posited El Nino hasn't eventuated yet. So shouldn't that link have meant cooler global temperatures?

      report
    7. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to John McLean

      Ah, the infamous McClean-Carter-DeFreitas "Detrend the data, then claim there isn't a trend" paper - worthy of an igNobel.

      Climate models have an excellent predictive track record. We are still well within the 2 sigma distribution of predictions of models Hansen et al were using in 1988, never mind the more recent models cf: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/hansens-1988-projections/
      McLean, on the other hand, by his own admission, has a 100% failure rate.

      report
    8. Brent Hoare

      logged in via Facebook

      In reply to John McLean

      Mssrs Mclean and Veerman, I think you owe Prof Trenberth an apology?

      Many thanks Prof Trenberth for your outstanding contribution to climate science, I certainly hope we will see more articles from you here too, and greatly appreciate your willingness to engage in the discussion in spite of the risk of unpleasant smears.

      report
    9. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Kevin Trenberth

      Pachauri over-reaches himself again. Nobel Prize Laureates are the designated winners of the Nobel prize. Pachauri can't hand-out laureates like cups of coffeee, and you, Kevin, surprise me by seeming to believe that he can.

      report
    10. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      So what? That's a certificate issued by the IPCC, not the certificate issued by the Nobel prize committee.

      report
    11. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Mike Hansen

      So what? That's a certificate issued by the IPCC, not the certificate issued by the Nobel prize committee.

      report
    12. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Brent Hoare

      Not at all. It's Trenberth that owes us and the wider public an apology for his false statement in his web page.

      report
    13. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Account Deleted

      Did you read our response to the false criticism of the paper? That criticism was a piece of misdirection that also contained completely false accusations about what we said.

      Example - we quoted or paraphrased the 2007 IPCC report saying that ENSO models couldn't reliably predict ENSO conditions 12 months ahead. The criticism of our paper claimed that we said ENSO models didn't work period.

      Example 2 - the "abstract" of the criticism claimed that we said the strong correlation was between…

      Read more
    14. Glenn Tamblyn

      Mechanical Engineer, Director

      In reply to John McLean

      John

      "The opening paragraph of the criticism said that our claimed relationship was between the detrended values, which is an entirely different (and in this case accurate) matter."

      Absolutely correct. But as a consequence of that fact, your paper was thus reporting on the connection between ENSO and short term variations (1 year type time scales). So your paper was saying zero, zip, nada about any connection between ENSO and longer term warming trends. As it was, validly,described at the time…

      Read more
    15. Chris O'Neill

      Victim of Tony Abbotts Great Big New Tax

      In reply to John McLean

      You forgot the ridiculing (or gloating over as you call it) of your confusion about what "With every degree C, the water holding of the atmosphere goes up 7%" means. (Trenberth was referring to 7% increase of water vapor, not 7% increase of temperature.)

      I can see why you wouldn't want to mention this. Makes you look like a right clown.

      report
    16. Lennert Veerman
      Lennert Veerman is a Friend of The Conversation.

      Senior Research Fellow, School of Population Health at University of Queensland

      In reply to Brent Hoare

      It seem that I did not express myself clearly enough. (Humour can be tricky in written form.)

      I never intended to accuse Prof Trenberth of misleading statements. Rather, I checked his website and found that, contrary to John's claim, prof Trenberth accurately reported that the Nobel Prize had been awarded to the IPCC. I think he fully deserves to be included in that honour and is more than justified to mention this on his website.

      report
    17. Yoron Hamber

      Thinking

      In reply to John McLean

      Trolling, Are we John?:)
      It doesn't really matter what Nobel prizes are awarded to whom. What matters is the science, and fact gathering. If he feels proud over being on the Nobel prize winning team then that's okay by me but it will be the facts that decide what I think, not prizes. And this storm I see as a result of global warming in that motto that winds, humidity, sea temperatures, ice loss (fresh water added to oceans), all are connected by one thing. Our tampering with the climate.

      report
    18. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to John McLean

      Maybe you should focus your efforts on getting Lord Monckton to acknowledge that he isn't a Nobel laureate, first.

      report
    19. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to John McLean

      Au contraire, John. The Nobel committee explicitly told the IPCC that "it was up to the IPCC to decide what it would do to recognize the various contributors." In other words, Pachauri and the IPCC secretariat were given the freedom to recognise contributors to the IPCC's achievement as the IPCC saw fit.
      http://rabett.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/eli-gets-email.html

      This failure holds your analysis and prediction failure rate at a steady 100%. Keep it up!

      report
    20. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to John McLean

      What I read was numerous press releases from your little coterie claiming that you had proved long-term global warming was mostly due to ENSO, whereas since you had detrended the data, you had proved diddly-squat, and (as you now admit) you knew that at the time.

      report
    21. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to John McLean

      Wrong again, John.

      The Norwegian Nobel committee wrote to the IPCC and said that "it was up to the IPCC to decide what it would do to recognize the various contributors." In other words, Pachauri and the secretariat had every right to recognise the contributers to winning a Nobel in whatever way they saw fit.

      http://rabett.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/eli-gets-email.html

      report
    22. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to John McLean

      What I read first was the press releases put out by your little coterie at the time, claiming that you had shown that global warming was mostly caused by ENSO, whereas, since you had detrended the data, you had shown diddly-squat. What's more (as even you now admit you had detrended the data) you knew you were lying at the time.

      report
    23. Spiro Vlachos

      AL

      In reply to Account Deleted

      Maybe you guys should go counting polar bears.

      report
    24. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Account Deleted

      You are joking, right?

      That would be like a movie studio saying that all the people who worked on a movie that got some award could all publically declare themselves to be winners of that award.

      That would be stupid beyond belief.

      "Nobel Laureate" has one definition - the winner of a Nobel Prize. It's not a flexible definition; it's not something that others can handout.

      Besides which elsewhere on the web, at more accurate sites that Rabbett, you'll find that the one of the Nobel committee was asked whether Mann had won a Nobel Prize and the answer was no, it was the IPCC as an organisation (which incidentally is in breach of Nobel's original statement that individuals would get the prize.)

      report
    25. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

      In reply to John McLean

      This issue is just a deliberate distraction from the topic of the article.

      So what if he said the wrong thing about the Nobel prize? (I'm not saying that he was wrong).

      report
    26. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to Account Deleted

      If you read the McLean paper, AND have some small understanding of science, it is perfectly clear that the analysis was done on the trended data. The "reply" by Foster et al. was dishonest in the extreme as they must have known they were referring to the McLean (Figure 7 I think it was) totally erroneously. This is of course not uncommon among climate change "scientists" as the emails from CRU and UEA clearly showed.

      report
    27. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

      In reply to John Nicol

      Why argue about details when you think the whole thing is a sham?

      Much more useful to tells us how all the other scientists who read this paper also got it wrong. Incompetence? Conspiracy?

      report
    28. John Nicol

      logged in via email @bigpond.com

      In reply to John McLean

      It is worth noting that the Nobel Committee awarded them a "Peace" prize, NOT a Science prize. I wonder why!!!! Perhaps it was encouragement for them not to become too aggressive when they found that in fact the globe did not warm as fast as predicted, the sea did not rise at all beyond the 150 year average rate, .....and that it rained again in Queensland.

      Would you believe, someone has seriously suggested here that Sandy caused more devastation because "Global Warming" has caused a higher sea surface which increased flooding!!! Of course the actual fact was that it was a night of a full moon and king tides.

      report
    29. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Kevin Trenberth

      5 people endorse a statement by Trenberth that quotes or paraphrases a foolish and baseless comment by Pachauri.

      Incredible!

      When people don't seem to understand the very simple matter of what "Nobel Laureate" then what hope for a sensible and informed discussion of climate matters?

      report
    30. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      The simply answer is that it reflects on his credibility.

      His CV was claiming that he was something that he was not, so I question whether he might exaggerate or distort other matters too.

      Just for the record, on the Internet there's plenty of comment by highly qualified scientist that Sandy had nothing to do with anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

      Can I also remind you that in 2006 Trenberth declared that hurricanes were being influenced by CO2 emissions and it resulted in Chris Landsea, a far greater expert in hurricane issues than Trenberth, to resign from his authorship of the 2007 IPCC report, saying that he was not prepared to be undermined by a chapter lead author (or was it co-ordinating lead author) who knew less about hurricanes than he did.

      report
    31. John McLean

      logged in via email @connexus.net.au

      In reply to Yoron Hamber

      It does matter when someone falsely claims that they are a Nobel Laureate.

      What else are they exaggerating?

      report
    32. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

      In reply to John McLean

      I'm getting rather tired of repeatedly asking for some evidence that casts sensible doubt onto the big picture of climate change.

      If there is any evidence that the science is exaggerating the impacts of climate change then please put up or shut up.

      report
    33. Account Deleted

      logged in via email @drdrb.net

      In reply to John McLean

      You, sir, are a demonstrable liar and serial exaggerator, as was shown by your attempt to beat up your one and only paper to mean something it obviously did not. You are in no position to credibly cast aspersions on anyone else's scientific reputation.

      report
  5. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

    Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

    Tonight's ABC TV News reported on Sandy without mentioning climate change, so I googled 'sandy storm climate change'. The results for news were:

    Sandy storm expected to stun US and be a climate change reminder
    Times of India‎ - 4 hours ago
    New York City and Washington DC have shut down. Transit system (subways, metros, buses) will not ply, schools and colleges are closed.
    Hurricane Sandy: Climate Change Activists Offer Stark Reminder Before Storm Hits
    Huffington Post‎ - 9 hours ago
    Hurricane Sandy mixes super-storm conditions with climate change
    The Conversation‎ - 9 hours ago

    So India and Australia seem to be mentioning climate change more than the USA !!!!

    Sad to then see that the 7:30 Report item on Sandy also failed to mention climate change.
    Much easier politically for the ABC to pretend that such storms will remain a rarity.

    Did the Asian Century white paper mention climate change? If it did no media that I read or saw mentioned it.

    report
    1. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      Writer (ex telecommunications engineer)

      In reply to Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

      As I said above, climate change wasn't mentioned in the reports on Sandy on Monday night's ABC TV news or the 7:30 report.

      So what happened in Tuesday night's long report on the 7pm TV news and the even longer report on the 7:30 Report?

      No surprises - once again 'climate change' wasn't mentioned.

      The commercial TV networks and the Murdoch press have a well know bias to the right. But many people still think of the ABC as being balanced. So much for any resemblance of reporting the key issues because when both Labor and Liberal don't want the public to demand more action on climate change it seems that the ABC is willing to do their bidding and remain silent.

      This bias is shocking.

      report
  6. Lynne De Weaver
    Lynne De Weaver is a Friend of The Conversation.

    Managing Director

    I too have family living in that part of the world - Connecticut - and they're already experiencing flooding. The link to climate change is very clear and very real. Makes you wonder when the NYS government will start building sea walls like Holland does around NYC Harbor!

    report