TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 10 °C Sunday 26 May, 2013

Column: Hurricane Isaac should make us think seriously about climate change

Catastrophic events like Hurricane Isaac highlight the reality of climate change – those that believe it is fictional are in denial, writes Gavin Harte.

Gavin Harte

MARK TWAIN ONCE said “everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it”.

The weather certainly does grab the headlines. Especially when a catastrophic event like Hurricane Isaac ploughs into the southern US states causing, it is estimated, nearly $2.5 billion worth of economic loss.

Isaac was only a category one storm, but its toll on the US Gulf Coast exceeded what one might expect from a “low-end” tropical storm. So as soon as the rain stopped, and the floods began to subside, people started to talk about Isaac and climate change.

Weather and climate

At this point it’s important that we stop and understand that there is a clear difference between every day weather events like Hurricane Isaac and our planet’s climate system.

To understand this distinction we need to think of weather as the day-to-day chaotic fluctuation of our planet’s atmosphere. Is it hot, is it cold, is it wet is it dry? This is weather. Climate on the other hand makes up the trends and patterns in weather over relatively long periods of time. We need to think of climate as summer, autumn, winter or spring. The kind of weather we are likely to experience over a certain time period.

Weather tells us what clothes we should wear. Climate tells us what clothes we should buy.

The scientific evidence supporting climate change is now overwhelming. In fact I would suggest that anyone who says that our planet is not warming simply doesn’t understand the science or holds an ideological position that can’t process the science. There is no more doubt that our planet is warming and this is a result of human activity.

Evidence

We know empirically that our planet is absorbing more energy than it is emitting and this is directly linked to the increase of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere because of burning fossil fuels.

A recent study by NASA scientists at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies used global recorded temperature data, rather than prediction models to show that climate change is responsible for recent extreme weather events. The author of the study, Dr James Hansen explained the recent increase in extreme weather events by saying that the chances of these events happening naturally – without climate change – is negligible.

If Mark Twain was around today he’d probably say “everybody talks about climate change, but nobody does anything about it!” The evidence of global warming is all around us.

Prior to Hurricane Isaac, June 2012 marked the warmest 12 month period in the US since record-keeping began in 1895. Globally, June 2012 has seen the all-time warmest average land surface temperature since record-keeping began in 1880.

Carbon Emissions

Humans are now emitting around 30,000,000,000 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. When scientists measure the type of carbon accumulating in the atmosphere, they observe more of the type of carbon that comes from burning fossil fuels. Oxygen levels in the atmosphere are falling in line with the amount of carbon dioxide rising. Basic combustion chemistry.

Satellites are measuring less heat escaping out into space at the particular wavelengths that CO2 absorbs it. The green house effect. As greenhouse gases stop this heat from reaching the upper atmosphere, a distinct greenhouse signature is a warming the lower atmosphere and cooling the upper atmosphere.

Our planet is also warming faster at night than it is during the day. Another scientific phenomenon in line with increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.

I could go on and I’m sure some climate change deniers will respond to this article with their usual half truths, myths, distortions and cherry picking of “scientific fact”. ButI will preempt them now. They are wrong, they are in denial.

Elizabeth Kubler Ross, a Swiss American psychiatrist, defined five stages that people go through when they receive catastrophic news. The five stages are denial, anger, bargaining, depression and finally acceptance.

Maybe the reason we are all talking about climate change but doing nothing about it is that we don’t yet accept the clear evidence of science. Unfortunately that’s not very smart – because time is running out!

Gavin Harte has been a spokesperson on environmental and sustainability issues in Ireland for many years. He has worked as the national director of An Taisce and was the founder and developer of Ireland’s first eco-village in Cloughjordan Co Tipperary and now runs ESD Training, his consultancy for Education on Sustainable Development.

Read next:

Comments (109 Comments)

  • I think people are arguing over what is causing it but not many solutions are being put forward. Even if we have a negligible influence on change in our climate we still have to deal with what may happen. Population is the bigger long term threat. It is becoming a ponzi scheme.

    Reply
  • I wonder if dinosaur dung cause global warming back then, they say Cow dung amounts to a certain percentage of emissions, can you imagine the size of dinosaur poo?

    Reply
  • What happened global warming? When the earth was no longer getting warmer the term changed to climate change. By the way what happened the crisis facing the ozone layer? The earth is many million years old. 30 years is too small sample to prove anything conclusively. Within millions of years there are many many natural cycles.

    Reply
    • The term was never global warming. The phrase “global warming” was invented by the media, not the scientists, who by and large didn’t like the term at the time.

      The ozone layer is still damaged – the hole in it shows up every year in the polar regions on a seasonal basis and will do for the next sixty to seventy years until the CFCs in the upper atmosphere break down; but through the montreal accord, we prevented that hole from growing to encompass populated regions.

      As to your version of the state of the climate versus that of the consensus of professional climatologists after sixty years of research and debate… well, to quote Dara O’Brien:

      There’s a kind of notion that everyone’s opinion is equally valid. My arse! A bloke who’s been a professor of dentistry for 40 years doesn’t have a debate with some idjit who removes his teeth with string and a door!

      Reply
    • Exactly. Its a scam. Carbon tax and carbon trading. Bang… a whole new market to scam nations out of money.

      I loved when we had the cold spells. No a word from those Carbon Nazis. No ads on tv, no global warming press releases and not a peep from the likes of Mr Harte.

      Climate chage is real. The world has been experiencing it for over 4 billion years.

      Tell me, can anyone explain the medival warming period to me. England and ireland were to warm, wine vines were grown all around London.
      This and many other little warming and cooling periods were left out of the study which turned into a Documentry. Gore, a carbon trader himself has made millions on the lie that humans are the main and direct cause of Global Warming/Climate Change.

      See how they phrase a person how doesnt believe this? You are a DENIER. Putting you on the same page as Holocaust ‘Deniers’.
      And he pushes that home in the very first paragragh.

      No talk of the massive growth in the Antartic ice mass or the famous Global Cooling press releases of the 1970s.

      Ice core samples showing the increase and decrease of temps over thousands of years. No, lets not talk about that. How about the same temp increases and decreases on Venus amd Mars. Nope lets not mention that. Because if you do, you are a denier.

      Reply
    • The global average temp. is still rising, the trend is still up. There has been no shortage of days this summer, where one could stand in a tshirt in a shed and look at an inch of rain fall. Weather like this is not normal. If this was normal. much of this country would no be viable agriculture land for the last 300 years. The last 3 years have been brutal. It mightn’t mean much to you, cosseted in the safe world of “conservative paranoia” and chat show hosts backing you but for people who live every day outdoors, whose livelihood depend on the weather and who family have worked ground for 170 years. It is a bit much for us to take your word that dry ground should be 6 inches of shi5 and mud in the middle of August.

      Reply
    • @Arjun.. maybe you should have a day off and go and see a few Yanks running around Aviva.. Might take your mind off things.. You seem to like that type of nonsensical garbage of a sport/tourism yada yada yada

      Reply
    • @jason as i predicted the usual half truths, myths, distortions and cherry picking of “scientific fact”. PS I was “peeping” right through the winter of 2009/10 and on the money then to! http://m.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/dec/14/cold-winters-global-warming?cat=environment&type=article
      This why it’s called “global warming” and not “in my back yard warming”

      Reply
    • Are you seriously quoting the Guradian?

      That bastion of impartiality and unfettered truth, always relied upon not to take the far-left stand on even the weather.

      Reply
    • Jason Bourne

      Good points there Mr. Bourne, too good, I think the far-left stasi thought control police will have to delete your comment and block you. In about 5 years time, they will up it to actually knocking on your door.

      Reply
    • Ok so you don’t like the Guardian! My second point on climate denial. “Anyone who says that our planet is not warming simply doesn’t understand the science or holds an ideological position that can’t process the science.” http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110112_globalstats.html

      Reply
    • lol Daivd,

      You are still a bit sore over the lot of red thumbs u got over the American football game. Man if u give a toss about what people here think, then u are very mixed up. This is just a mind stream forum.

      Reply
    • @Jason
      There were some interesting points there. I’m having trouble finding much to support your claims though. The only papers that I can find on the global mean temperature over the past 1000 years seem to say that while there was a warming during medieval times, it was slower and of a lower magnitude than what we’re experiencing now. Can you point me in the direction of some sources that state otherwise?

      Similarly, when you mention the “growth of the Antartic ice mass”, all I can find on that are a few articles printed in The Australian and news.com.au (both News Limited) that misinterpret a study of ice levels in the Antarctic and seem to use it to muddy the waters when its been shown that the total ice coverage over the Antarctic is decreasing. http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice.htm
      Maybe you’re referring to something else though.

      The same goes for your global cooling in the 1970’s comment. Other than a few newspaper trying to sell some more copies by taking advantage of a few outlying temperatures, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record_(NASA).svg I can’t find much of a consensus in the scientific community at the time that this was actually going to be a long term trend. Certainly nowhere near the level of agreement that they have now with regards to the current situation.

      Reply
    • censored 01/09/12 #

      Of course the earth will survive. But … in most of those millions of years the earth was uninhabitable by humans.

      Reply
  • Good to see someone actively trying to protect our planet. However, it cannot be stated that “We know empirically that our planet is absorbing more energy than it is emitting and this is directly linked to the increase of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere because of burning fossil fuels”. You cannot use the word empirical for one area and then try and join the concept of burning of fossil fuels to this. How about the empirical fact that all human activity on planet earth contributes to between 2-3% of all greenhouse gases. Yes that’s right, planet earth creates the other 97%. Observations cannot be made using data dating back to 1880, that is much too short a time frame. Climate change has happened countless times before and will surely happen again.

    Reply
  • We can’t do anything about climate change with out the big four, USA China Europe and Brazil, for us to do anything would be like trying to melt an ice burg with a hair dryer.

    Reply
  • Gavin is writin about it and bringing it to all of our attention again!

    Reply
  • @mark I stand corrected. Should have stuck with an extended period of low sunspot activity, does that sound better?

    Reply
  • Denialists don’t deny Climate Change is happening, they disagree on it being anthropogenic.

    Anyway this isn’t about science, it isn’t even about whether weather is climate or vice versa (although, http://damoclesbda.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/weather-%E2%89%A0-climate/ y’know)

    It’s about PR machines, yours is well funded and endorsed by the UN, there’s is peopled by idiots.

    Reply
  • Thomas 01/09/12 #

    My personal opinion is that we’ve increased the co2 concentrations in the atmosphere and that this is having an impact on the climate which is difficult to accurately attribute and predict.
    However I’d like to post this link to a graph by NASA highlighting the recent and historic global co2 concentrations.
    http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

    Reply
  • Gavin what are YOU doing about it?

    Reply
    • Do you mean apart from all the above?

      Reply
    • Is it enough?

      Reply
    • Who knows Ken, who knows….

      Reply
    • He left his fridge open! What are you doing about it?

      Seriously though the weather in this country has gone to shi5. Cattle in and being fed since June and at this stage, it looks like they stay in. That is a lot of work and feed and not a penny profit this year for a lot of us. I’m lucky in that it is a side job but for a lot of people it is brutal and it following 3 bad years as is. The net worth of agri and food industry to this state is 18bn, the net worth of the Pharma industry, our biggest exporter is 8bn. Yet because it is a glam, multi national industry it is lauded above all, even though its net benefit isn’t that big. Important yes no doubt.

      Another year like this and a lot of people will be calling it quits and deciding to plant their land instead. It is bad enough with Larry Goodman and friends paying us 300 a head less per head than a kill in a British factory. Then again Larry never coughed up to an English PM like he did to Haughey hear. Once bought, stay bought seems to be the motto here.

      Reply
    • He is adding to it, by talking a load of hot air.

      Reply
  • Well it looks like we’re heading into a maunder minimum which caused a little ice age that lasted for 65 years in the 1600s so there’s a lot more to the sun’s activity that needs to be looked at when it comes to “climate change”. Sure that volcano eyjafolllsomething was pumping out 344m tonnes of C02 per day, we aren’t the problem.

    Reply
    • That poor innocent volcano must have gotten a nasty carbon tax bill??nI honestly think it’s just an excuse to justify more taxes on energy and fossil fuels??

      Reply
    • It’s not “a maunder minimum”, it’s “the maunder minimum” and we can’t be heading into it because it took place in the 1600s. You might as well say we’re heading into a 1932. The term describes a unique event, not a regularly observed pattern.

      And again, see Dara’s quote above.

      Reply
  • The people nowadays who dismiss scientific evidence as conspiracy remind me of the peasants in the middle ages who burned people as witches or used to say the earth was flat – when will internet induced paranoia be classed as the mental illness that it is, the pro-science posters always do themselves proud as a well reasoned bunch though.

    Reply
  • I was at the Tall Ships and the American Football game in the Aviva when this all went down. CLimate change..?

    Reply
  • The normal person on the street are doing their part to cut down on climate change . They are recycling ,paying extra taxes on electrical equipment to have them properly disposed of as well as embracing new technologies to make their homes and modes of transport as energy efficient as possible.. Most people like living and want to see their kids and their kid’s kids have long and healthy lives. But their is only so much that the average person can do to live and survive in an environment that in most part has been planned and moulded for us to live in by the people at the highest levels of power.So as usual it all comes down to money ,greed , power fear and control..If these people at the top levels of power are brave enough to take the steps that are needed to make this planet a safer place for it’s people to survive in ,well it’s people will support them ..

    Reply
  • Mankind will never learn!

    Reply
    • More lies and spin about climate change. What happened to the term global warming?

      Another load of lies and spin, there is no man-made global warming, meanwhile the west is taxed to the hilt and our economies suffer as a result while China and India will gain bigtime.

      Reply
    • The term was never global warming. The phrase “global warming” was invented by the media, not the scientists, who by and large didn’t like the term at the time.
      The ozone layer is still damaged – the hole in it shows up every year in the polar regions on a seasonal basis and will do for the next sixty to seventy years until the CFCs in the upper atmosphere break down; but through the montreal accord, we prevented that hole from growing to encompass populated regions.
      As to your version of the state of the climate versus that of the consensus of professional climatologists after sixty years of research and debate… well, to quote Dara O’Brien:

      There’s a kind of notion that everyone’s opinion is equally valid. My arse! A bloke who’s been a professor of dentistry for 40 years doesn’t have a debate with some idjit who removes his teeth with string and a door!

      Reply
    • The real issue here is diversion.

      While there is all this focus and energy on this hoax, the real issues affecting our environment get put to oneside.

      Overfishing, pollution, over-use of water and our natural resources, wilderness habitat despoilation, encraochment of same, population explosion, all these things are the real environment disasters which are getting worse, and all this wasted money and energy going on this climate change (due to the sun) hoax.

      That’s the real crime here, by none other than Mr. Harte and other attention-seeking, cause-celebre getting egotists. Shameful.

      Reply
    • Yes, because we can’t do two things at once. That would be utterly impossible. It’s never happened in the entire, only-one-thing-at-a-time history of our species…

      Reply
    • To all the sceptics; say the earth takes in 100 units of energy per year from sunlight. 1000 years ago, this value was also given off by the plant through a range of factors such as ozone reflection, forest fires etc.

      All of a sudden, the population of the planet increases from 100 million to 8 billion. And each human now requires roughly 20 chickens and 3 cows per year, along with all the fuel required to heat, light, and transport a person around for a year. How much CO2 is that per person, per year??

      How can anyone realistically say that the amount of heat energy & CO2 generated on the planets surface is similar to that of 1000 years ago??!! It’s such a ridiculous argument to say that we can’t predict something is happening.

      If you put one person in a room the temperature may not increase, but if you put 20 people in a room along with 400 chickens and 60 cows, and start lots of lights, engines & heaters, the temperature will increase pretty quickly!!

      And therefore, is it not obvious that we are inducing a change in the atmosphere?

      Reply
    • I don’t think anyone can argue that climate change is happening. The real argument is around why. My own personal, albeit comparatively unqualified, point of view is that the ‘human’ element of global warming is over exaggerated. However, even if this is the case we still need the fear-inducing man-made global warming scare-fest. The real issue here isn’t the economy – its the finite nature of fossil fuels and, our dependency on them and the volatility of the global economy with respect to them. The sustainable technologies that will have to replace fossil fuels will take decades to design and perfect (if they work at all). Developing technology like this requires billions in R&D investment by global private industry. Private industry doesn’t spend money without an economic driver. So if we left it up to normal market drivers then we probably wouldn’t start developing the technology until fossil fuels peaked resulting in a global economic disaster. So governments needed a ‘movement’ that would get the ball rolling sooner, a politicised environmental driver for economic investment. The Kyoto protocol was the mechanism for this. It put monetary value on green technology by penalising excessive carbon emissions. The drivers to develop green technology were therefore now linked to environmental sentiment rather than energy cost.

      Reply
  • Ah yes. The recent power in the word ‘Denier’.

    Temps are changing at the same rate on mars. I know, tax me. That will sort everything.

    Reply
  • We should take better care of our planet but i wouldn’t be too fast to claim that us humans are destroying the climate the forests and the oceans maybe but i fear the likes of Al Gore is using the planets natural cycles to introduce more taxes on the populations.

    Reply
    • The science on this is pretty clear – the planet’s natural cycles have nothing to do with the current unprecedented rate of climate change…

      Reply
    • Pretty clear to who we’l have to take your word for it i suppose.

      Reply
    • mattoid 31/08/12 #

      If you don’t want to take my word for it maybe the entire global scientific community will suffice….:
      http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full

      Reply
    • Entire global scientific community i think you’ve been hoodwinked there Mattoid.I wont enjoy been taxed to the last cent for oxygen in the future .Population reduction been discussed aswell how are they going to manage that one in the timeframe like everything else time will tell.

      Reply
    • mattoid 01/09/12 #

      @Brend,
      Since you obviously didn’t want to take the time to follow my link I’ll make it easier for you:

      In a macro-analysis the 928 peer-reviewed climate studies that appeared in refereed scientific journals were categorised according to whether they found evidence of anthropomorphic climate change, found no evidence, or did not express an opinion either way.

      75% of the studies found that there was evidence, 25% expressed no opinion (they were mostly papers concerned more with methodology) and have a guess how many of the 928 found no evidence? Zero! Not a single study out of the 928 found no evidence!

      We know that for many years the fossil fuel industry have conducted a co-ordinated smear campaign to discredit genuine science and promote its own pseudo-scientific ‘proof’ in an attempt to muddy the waters and make out that there is no scientific consensus. The difference is that the so-called “scientific studies” promoted by the fossil fuel lobby are not peer-reviewed and have been dismissed by all serious climatologists as junk science.

      It seems that you are the one thats been hoodwinked Brend, by the corporate lies of the fossil-fuel industry.

      Reply
  • Imagine this climate change only to be a big hoax and all this effort to live cleaner and pollute less is all for nothing?

    Reply
  • Your question once again highlight the “cherry picking” nature of climate change of denial. While the Medieval Warm Period saw unusually warm temperatures in some regions, globally the planet was cooler than current conditions. This cherry picking of “science fiction” is a practice long performed by climate change denial folk.
    For “science fact” see the National Academy of Sciences Report on Climate Reconstructions.
    http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11676&page=2#p200108c09960002001
    Or there is an easily digestible version at
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/medieval-warm-period.htm
    You are providing a source that has been proven to be unsound. A television programme from a number of years ago called The Great Climate Change Swindle.
    In an official judgement issued in 2008 by the British media regulator Ofcom, it was declared that the final part of the film dealing with the politics of climate change had broken rules on “due impartiality on matters of major political and industrial controversy and major matters relating to current public policy”

    Reply
    • Yes but many *****IPCC lead authors***** agreed with the first 3/4ths of the video !! Who is cherry picking now?

      Reply
    • In answer to your question I would say its you who are cherry picking again.
      How many scientists support the science as you see it? Can you give me names and references
      Please don’t give me that whacky “Petition Project” which is supposed to have over 31,000 “scientists” signing an online petition stating “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide will, in the forseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere”. (Petition Project). PLEASE NOT THAT PLEASE!!!!

      Reply
  • Whether climate change is real or imagined, caused by humans or not we have to realise that there is not a whole heap we can do about it.
    We all use as little electricity, heating oil, petrol/diesel as possible for economic reasons. We all need to travel to and from work shops etc. It’s just the way things are. If you want to be more “green” it costs money, that people don’t have right now.
    We have to suck it up and adapt to whatever comes our way. We are constantly told that change is normal. However when it comes to climate we must stop it from changing? Totally impossible!
    There are the remains of human settlements under the English channel, climate changed and will continue to do so. We will have to adapt also, but for us to make a meaningful difference we need some major technological advances….

    Reply
  • In this so-called debate nobody ever seems to mention a little thing called the sun. Climate change is not caused by humans, it’s linked to solar activity.

    Reply
  • I agree with Gavin. Before global warming, uh, sorry, climate change was invented there were no hurricanes, storms, floods etc.. Climate change is a fact; the data published by the University of East Anglia proved it long ago. If you don’t believe in climate change and the end of the world you have your head, and possibly some other bits, in the sand.

    Reply
  • Gavin, my wife invested seven hundred pounds towards your development during the early nineties . Not a word since. Sound familiar?.

    Reply
    • Good morning, I noticed your post this morning and felt that I should reply.
      Not knowing your wife’s name I can only assume that she was one of the original 25 individuals who invested £700 at the start-up of Sustainable Projects Ireland Ltd a company limited by guarantee and based on co-operative principles.
      For the record this happened in early 2000. At this time your wife would have been an equal stakeholder in the company with the other 24 people who seed financed the company, including myself.
      For many and varied reasons people joined and left the company of their own free will and for their own reasons. I can only presume that your wife decided not to proceed. I believe all members understood the financial commitment they were making at each step in the company’s development. After all we were attempting to purchase 100 acres of land and this wasn’t going to happen with fresh air!
      As this article is dealing with climate change I see little point in discussing the http://www.thevillage.ie further at this time, although I do suggest you contact the company if you require further information.
      However if the journal.i.e. was interested in the challenges of developing a sustainable eco-village based on co-operative principles during Celtic Tiger Ireland I would be more than willing to discuss our experiences of Cloughjordan, both good and bad.

      Reply
    • My profound apologies Gavin. It was a cheap shot on my part, resulting from I don’t know what. Any mistakes that were made, were mine and mine alone. All the best for the future.

      Reply
  • I absolutely agree about the Petition Project, anyway it’s very out of date. Would you do me a favour, Gavin, if you have time would you watch the link below – or watch some of it. A small proportion of the scientists we are talking about are mentioned early on…

    http://youtu.be/YtevF4B4RtQ

    I am not expecting you to believe all of it. Use your judgement, as I did. Yet every week we hear of more experts in climate denying the “consensus”.

    Reply
  • What about the post regarding hurricanes – I quote again:
    It’s been 2,535 days since the last Category 3 storm, Wilma in 2005, hit the beach. That’s the longest period—by far—in the record that goes back to 1900.
    Consequently, the global warming hype machine is being reduced to running on Category 1 fumes. Hence last August’s Irene (which was barely a hurricane) and the recent Isaac (with a much more respectable wind field) became the sorry excuses used to hector the public into demanding massive energy taxes.

    Reply
  • OMG I wonder here they got this rubbish?

    ****As you can see hurricane activity has been reduced since Katrina****
    http://www.wunderground.com/education/websterfig2.gif

    Alarmists just can’t seem to buy a major hurricane.
    Category 1 Hurricane Hype
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickmichaels/2012/08/31/climate-change-alarmists-cant-seem-to-buy-a-major-hurricane/
    The U.S. just can’t seem to buy a major hurricane. It’s been 2,535 days since the last Category 3 storm, Wilma in 2005, hit the beach. That’s the longest period—by far—in the record that goes back to 1900.

    Consequently, the global warming hype machine is being reduced to running on Category 1 fumes. Hence last August’s Irene (which was barely a hurricane) and the recent Isaac (with a much more respectable wind field) became the sorry excuses used to hector the public into demanding massive energy taxes.

    But didn’t last year’s Irene drop a huge amount of rain, a sure sign of its ingestion of the global warming steroid? Not really. While that argument makes the alarmist blogs and MSNBC, it neglects that, everything else being equal, if hurricanes are becoming rainier, they must be getting stronger, as the fuel that drives the kinetic whirl of the tropical cyclone is the heat released by the condensation of water. Comprehensive global analyses of tropical cyclone strength show no change.

    Reply
    • http://www.galileomovement.com.au/docs/freedom_CO2_precis.pdf

      Carbon dioxide, CO 2 is not pollution of any kind.
      Carbon dioxide cannot do what is claimed by government and Greens.
      It is impossible for humans to control carbon dioxide levels in the air.
      To attempt to control carbon dioxide levels in the air is futile.
      It is an act of selfish, weak, cowardly stupidity to lie to divert funds from real environmental
      and humanitarian needs. It is shameful and inhumane.

      Reply
    • http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Galileo_Movement
      The Galileo Movement is a a climate skeptic lobby group set up to oppose carbon pricing, based in Australia. On its website the group states that “our objective is to expose misrepresentations pushing a ‘price on carbon dioxide’. In August 2011, the Scientific American magazine openly derided the group, describing it as “drawing from a deep history of denial and distortion” and relying on irrelevant facts while omitting pertinent ones.

      Reply
  • Right back in the world of the living after two days away and fairly decently burned due to my lack of sunscreens here in Wicklow, global warming I’ll have it if it gives me those two days.

    Gavin what I’m saying is that there is climate change and they’re natural cycles I’m not disputing the fact that we may be acclerating this particular cycle but life on this planet will carry on with or without us, the planet and nature will find a correction beit a virus or mass crop failure or simply oil running out. According to the “scientists” we’ve already reached the tipping point, mass release of co2 and methane (a more efficient greenhouse gas) from the seabed with a degree or two increase in sea temperatures.

    It’s inevitable, the question that needs to be asked is can we adapt, I think with a mass extinction or certainly a culling of the human population there may be hope.

    I’m not a scientist and can’t stand over any of the information above but working in the communications industry people have been and always will be manipulated by the flow of information.

    N

    Reply
  • Gavin, so do you also believe in population reduction as tool to save our planet. Can you explain the medieval warning period to me. People say it was warmer then than now but don’t know how that could be..

    Reply
  • Informing us!

    Reply
  • Anyone remember last time we had Portugese Men o’War in Irish waters?
    The earth does go through cycles but I think we’re accelerating the process.

    Reply
    • mattoid 31/08/12 #

      They’re actually not that uncommon in Irish waters, but you’re right, what’s happening at the moment is far removed from natural climate change, which occurs over millennia, not decades….

      Reply
    • For the first time in a 1000 years the arctic cap is accessible to boats most of the year. This is something different.

      Even if it not, man made, though I believe it is due to the speed of change we are facing a very difficult future. Look at the droughts in American and Russian and Ukraine this year. The bread baskets of the world. Food is going to jump in price next year. It will have political impact as well, there were less miserable harvests than this that led to food riots all over Africa and Asia. If this drought is a multi year one, and droughts often are, like cold winters here are, then grain supply is going to be a major political issue.

      We are facing probably, a few years of shi5 weather, poor food yields and economic stagnation.

      Thank God for my patient partner and strong bottles of beer.

      Reply
  • Gavin, it just struck me that you have a vested interest in global warming. Your articles should carry a health warning!

    Reply
  • The movement above (Galileo) may have an agenda, but are you denying the facts in the “pdf”? If you are you are totally without any regard for the facts.

    Reply
  • Blah blah climate change! It’s a hurricane in a hurricane prone part of the world. No big deal and nothing to do with climate change it’s just bloody weather! That said, Saffron I have to go and burn some witches, but wait, hold on I can’t, it’ll cause carbon emissions and the world will come to an end the ice caps will all melt and Ireland will become rain sodden wet and boggy place where only those living in the new green industry wind turbines that have replaced all the hideous pastel coloured bungalows all over the country will be safe! What am I to do? I’ll have to go my doctor and get some pills, i’m mad! Must be my cynical streak playing up again, maybe I need to a well reasoned scientist to tell me that for GREEN read TAX! Let me guess the recent run of rain and the shifting of the jet stream are all down to climate change too!

    Reply
  • 130mn each year Gavin eyjafolllsomething was doing 340mn per day which I mentioned it was an incident that is repeated throughout the planet with many erupting volcanoes

    Reply

Add New Comment