Say, What If Hurricane Matthew Is The New Normal Or Something? (It’s Not)

Hurricane Matthew swept through North Carolina on Saturday into Sunday. Now it is out to sea, and, interestingly, not doing a loop as all the models stated. It’s no longer even a tropical storm. But, hey, we’re doomed, because Warmists have not given up on their talking points. Here’s one of the more egregious bits of climaidiocy

Michael J. Allen: What if Hurricane Matthew is the new normal?

ON SATURDAY, Hurricane Matthew made landfall northeast of Charleston, S.C., as a Category 1 storm. Before reaching the United States, Matthew reached Category 5 status with sustained winds of 160 miles per hour. The storm left at least a thousand dead in Haiti and brought significant storm surge and flooding to the eastern United States.

Early estimates suggest the cost of the disaster may be in the tens of billions of dollars. And while recovery along the Eastern Seaboard may take months, less-resilient locations may be left to cope with the disaster for years.

As a climatologist, I understand that the relationships between hurricanes and climate are complex — El Niño-La Niña, Madden-Julian Oscillation, various natural and anthropogenic factors. But the context of Hurricane Matthew in a changing climate needs to be explained.

Despite clouded narratives attempting to politicize the issue, the science of climate change is clear. It’s happening, and it’s happening now. The U.S. military calls climate change a significant and direct threat. The Lancet, the world’s premier medical journal, calls climate change a medical emergency. These are the facts.

However, there is no concrete, scientific proof that it is mostly/solely anthropogenic.

According to the National Weather Service in Wakefield, Hurricane Matthew brought 7.14 inches of precipitation to Norfolk International Airport on Saturday, shattering the previous record of 3.16 inches. This follows record precipitation in July and earlier this fall at ORF.

A warmer world does increase the probability of stronger, weather-related hazards. Like a Hurricane Matthew or Superstorm Sandy.

Yet, there has been no repeat of Sandy (which was made worse at landfall in NJ and the Northeast by a cold front), and Matthew was not a major hurricane at landfall. Funny how we had more hurricane landfalls when the world wasn’t The Warmist In Recorded History meaning we’re doomed!!!!!!!!

We must consider extreme events within the context of a changing climate. We are living in a new normal — a normal where likelihood of extreme events may be more common, costly and worse not only here in the United States, but elsewhere around the world.

Except, they aren’t happening. Weather events have always happened, but, there is no giant growth of floods, droughts, tropical storms, winter storms (which, of course, the Warmists blame on AGW/ACC), rain storms, nor tornadoes, among other weather events.

The only thing that has grown is the non-science doomsaying from members of the Cult of Climastrology.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “Say, What If Hurricane Matthew Is The New Normal Or Something? (It’s Not)”

  1. alanstorm says:

    “The U.S. military calls climate change a significant and direct threat. The Lancet, the world’s premier medical journal, calls climate change a medical emergency. These are the facts.”

    Those are not facts, those are opinions. And the only reason the military calls it a threat is because they’ve been ORDERED to consider it thus by their commander, who isn’t fit to serve.

  2. john says:

    Teach if not from CO2 then why are temps going up at a rate higher than anytime in the last 11000 years?
    The Sun is less powerful than in 1960, why are temps going up with a weaker Sun?

  3. o0Nighthawk0o says:

    I suppose that John is one of those that think that Summer is when the Earth is closer to the Sun and Winter when it’s further away.

    The real fact here is that we understand so very little about the way the climate works and what effects it the most, that solely blaming climate change on man’s activities is simply guesswork.

  4. Hoagie says:

    Teach if not from CO2 then why are temps going up at a rate higher than anytime in the last 11000 years?

    Where on earth do you get this nonsense from, john, some of those “smart” guys you’re always touting? They know the temps over the last 11000 years? What was the temp on August 3, 870 BC, in Australia?

    The Sun is less powerful than in 1960, why are temps going up with a weaker Sun?

    Who told you the sun is less powerful now than in 1960, another “smart” guy? Think about that statement john. The word “balderdash” should come to mind.

    John, you are not a climate scientist so please stop trying to play one on the internet.

  5. Jl says:

    John -We have no idea comparatively how fast temps are or aren’t going up for the last 11000 years. We only have a thermometer record of 135 years. What alarmist site sold you that stupid info? To put it another way, how in the world could we know how fast temps were rising for all the other 135 year periods within the last 11000, seeing as there were no thermometers?

  6. Liam Thomas says:

    The Lancet, the world’s premier medical journal, calls climate change a medical emergency.

    I despise this far left wing whacko organization.

    For example:At most scientific journals, alarm bells might have gone off over the likely biases of a Riyadh Lafta. But the editor of the Lancet, physician Richard Horton, has unapologetically used the journal for advocacy on other issues, including a notorious 1998 paper that created an international panic over the safety of the childhood vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella [the MMR] – linking it to autism and bowel disease.

    Another example: Lancet’s 2006 study was about half funded by antiwar billionaire George Soros, who in a November 2003 Washington Post interview said that removing President Bush from office was the “central focus of my life” and “a matter of life and death.”

    Another Example:The latest study, called the Iraq Family Health Survey (IFHS), was published in the January 9 issue of the nation’s most prestigious medical journal, the New England Journal of Medicine. It found an estimated 151,000 excess violent deaths from the U.S-led invasion in March 2003 through June 2006,

    HOWEVER:Two years later, the Lancet updated that figure to a stunning 655,000 Iraqis dead by July 2006 as a consequence of the March 2003 U.S. invasion,

    FACTS? REALLY? FACTS?

    Its a lying, agenda driven organization whose sole goal is to build a new world order funded by George Soros.

Bad Behavior has blocked 7733 access attempts in the last 7 days.