Sunday, November 18, 2012

"Judith Curry on ‘dogma’ and ideology" and the IPCC - thoughts to consider

I came across this article by Chris Colose, a PhD student in an Atmospheric Science program.  It's two years old, but than Judith Curry has been attacking the IPCC for a while now.  The article does a excellent job of outlining the flaws in Judith's assertion and anyone interested in a clearer understanding of the real story behind the IPCC would benefit from reading: "Judith Curry on ‘dogma’ and ideology"  

Chris Colose has given me permission to reprint his entire article.  

I have added some web links, highlights and sentence breaks where I thought they were appropriate - text remains unaltered.   {11/23/12}

Judith Curry on ‘dogma’ and ideology
Posted on November 9, 2010 | by Chris Colose

What's Up With That IPCC... no consensus on consensus ???

I'm confounded by the way people swallow Curry, Anthony et al. slanders of the IPCC.   You see, it's one thing to take issue with a study or statement but to misrepresent and then paint this organization into that villainous characterature they have done is ridiculous... no, it's plain dishonest.  Chris Colose wrote a good two-thousand word essay a couple years back that remains as valid today as it was then, here's an except:
". . . I think there’s a lot of misconception on this issue and I see no evidence that Judith is thinking clearly with respect to her claims about the IPCC. Much of the debate has centered around semantics and definitions, so I want to start off with what many people take as “sides” to the debate, particularly when saying things like “the IPCC view” or identifying what a “skeptic” means. Much of the confusion is centered directly on how the scientific community comes to acquire knowledge on a specific topic, or how knowledge of global climate change has evolved. 
The fourth assessment report of the IPCC consisted of three volumes of work, on the scale of ~1000 pages each, with the goal of summarizing research in the areas of the physical science, impacts, and policy of climate change. The AR4 does not represent original research, and so to begin with what Judith and other commenter’s refer to as the “IPCC view” is in reality the aggregate work done by the community in whatever sub-topic is being discussed, expressed as a summary of the “balance of evidence.”

Saturday, November 17, 2012

The IPCC's consensus conspiracy

In light of my little visit with Curry's Blog and sort of keeping up on the endless dog-chasing-tail talking going on over there I'm reminded that stuff like this review of scientific consensus doesn't get around the circuit near enough. ~ ~ ~ So I will make my futile attempt to bring it Back Down to Earth by sharing this write up by James Powell. It's posted at but they are kind enough to allow for sharing. ====================================================================== Courtesy of ======================================================================
Why Climate Deniers Have No Scientific Credibility - In One Pie Chart (via Desmogblog)

This is a guest post by James Lawrence Powell.* Polls show that many members of the public believe that scientists substantially disagree about human-caused global warming. The gold standard of science is the peer-reviewed literature. If there is disagreement among scientists, based not on opinion…

Thursday, November 15, 2012

The Educational Climate Science videos of Peter Hadfield

I just posted this over at my Citizenschallenge blogspot, but considering the denial of information that skeptics are guilty of I've decided to also post it over here.  It's for folks who are interested in learning more.  It is true that Hadfield get's attacked by some skeptics, er denialist - but the proof is in the pudding and if you follow up on the authoritative sources upon which Hadfield reports, you will find that he is true to the data and has much to share.

While "skeptical" websites such as Curry's blog, or WUWT, or ClimateAudit, et al. spend endless hours side tracking the real issues and making mountains out of moles, in order to shield themselves for the full spectrum of Earth observation evidence ~ Hadfield's series explains the various aspects of our global heat distribution engine and why we as a people should be taking the scientists' consensus seriously. 

  And since I have some free time, I figured why not put together an index of Peter Hadfield's video series ~ it does an excellent job of reviewing what the scientific "consensus" on Climate Change is all about.

Grab the popcorn and sit down for some easy learning.   ;-)

Potholer Climate videos

Uploaded by potholer54 
Peter Hadfield 

2. Climate Change -- the objections 
by potholer54 ~ 7:25 

11a. Sources for my last video 
by potholer54 ~ 9:25 

14 - BP oil spills and an end to snow 
by potholer54 ~ 14:34 

Monckton Bunkum Part 2 - Sensitivity 
by potholer54 ~ 15:24 


This has been all about Peter Hadfield but I shouldn't ignore Peter Sinclair, aka Greenman3610, and his top notch coverage of the AGW "debate"... story...

Greenman3610 ~ Climate Denial Crock of the Week 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Peter Sinclair interviews Peter Hadfield
Potholer54/Greenman3610 - The Search for Lord Monckton


A little deep background is also valuable.
Here is an interesting series that introduces one to Earth as a dynamic entity.  Incidentally, I believe it's impossible to appreciation AGW without appreciating the evolution of climate.

How the Earth Made Us
Professor Iain Stewart
BBC documentary

Monday, November 12, 2012

Dear Judith Curry fans and other Republicans,

In light of the fruitless dialogue I'm having with Curry fans at her: 
"Climate change: no consensus on consensus" thread:
I though I'd write a letter.

Dear Judith Curry fans and other Republicans,

Recently I listened to an interesting talk given by Dan Leonard, of WSI (The Weather Channel): 
"Seasonal Forecasting - How is it Possible?"
It was part of a series taken at the "Weather and Climate Summit" this past January
[ ]  and though it has to do with forecasting temperatures more than long term climate issues I still found it interesting.

Particularly when a good deal of the last half of Dan's talk was about examining WSI's bad forecast for December 2011.  It's a fascinating review of the complexity of our atmosphere's heat distribution engine

Towards the end it got me to thinking about the way "skeptical" folks and denialists "frame" their arguments and justifications.  Always making out the "consensus" scientist as the bad guy and any little flaw as a "smoking gun" to attack.

During this talk it was interesting seeing how professionals go at their tasks.  They made a very bad forecast, they focused on examining and understanding what went wrong and now they were sharing that learning process with other meteorologists.  Just another day in the continuing education that is science.

I bring this up because I am disturbed by the extent to which the "AGW skeptical" community depends on character assassination, sinister implications, heck even out and out paranoia and the one-world government and black helicopters thing.  With never a straight answer to be offered.

You claim I'm naive because I don't see it your way - after all it's so freak'n obvious.  So obvious none of you bothers to provide any objective list of evidence justifying your demonization and distrust?  

Why should I believe your claims of the supposed sins and frauds the community of climate and Earth scientists have committed - when you can never offer straight answers?

Why am I naive, because I believe serious professionals - folks who are dedicated to understanding and learning and figuring out how our planet's global heat distribution engine operates?  Why do you find it more naive than believing something you can't objectively support?

And you with the denialist mindset... ever consider your own naivety?  I believe your problem is that you can't admit to yourselves that you're dreadfully scared of changing anything about your lives and business?  Thus you refuse considering anything that might upset your boat. Like the guy who refuses to see a doctor for those chronic pains because the doctor might have bad news.

How naive is it assuming scientists are all part of a world conspiracy to take away your god blessed life-style?  

How naive is it to assume that evidence across dozens of disciplines and nations of researchers - can be coordinated in order to trick us into a one world government?  

The real world isn't that simple.  Scientists are competitive and intent on outdoing the next scientific team.  Flawed or manipulated evidence get's discovered and exposed by competing teams.  

But the denialist expects me to believe that's all a front?  Even though, you don't produce any simple objective lists outlining all these supposed frauds.

Instead you endlessly flog Mann and his hockey stick as though dynamic science doesn't include mistakes and ragged edges.  You never mention that all those flaws and uncertainties you consider so sinister where in actuality discussed and were part of the science moving forward.  Rather than accepting such facts of science - you intend to continue distracting, misdirecting and avoiding the real issues by forcing your paranoid beliefs {that your life style is under attack and that climatologists are an enemy} into swamping what should be a sober discussion.

Shame on you.

There's an educational seven part series of videos that explains the fundamentals of what is happening within our global heat distribution engine.  I challenge any "skeptic" out there to explain why I should ignore this sort of information.

This isn't the stuff of conspiracy, this is Earth Observation.
I wonder how "skeptics" find it so easy to dismiss this sort of basic understanding of our global heat distribution engine.

For more:

Climate Change Line of Evidence - videos: Part I
Filed under: 

 — group @ 9 October 2012 
The US National Research Council has been doing a lot recently to expand background knowledge of the climate system and of climate change. In tandem with a new report discussing strategies for advancing climate modeling, they have put up a an introductory web site on climate models (including some interviews with some actual climate modelers). 
More comprehensively, they have helped put together a series of videos discussing everything from the definition of climate to attribution of climate changes and future projections. 
The series is in seven parts, viewable here. 
There are additional resources here.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Weather and Climate Summit - lecture series

I've come across this series of lectures and since they speak directly to teaching the reality of climate change.

I love these sorts of videoed lectures because I get to listen to actual scientists, people who are on the front lines doing the difficult work.  They consistently impress and educate.  And they bring home the point that uncertainly does not equal not knowing!

In my recent conversations at the JudithCurry discussion forum, I'm struck by their long winded grandiloquence, such as: “defenders of the IPCC consensus have expended considerable efforts in the ‘boundary work’ of distinguishing those qualified to contribute to the climate change consensus from those who are not [4]."  
~ ~ ~
Trying to inject distrust, simply by making claims, never appreciating or sharing that what we are talking about is dedicated people - researchers and scientists and support staff going out in the field to conducting studies and doing the research and trying to be as accurate as possible in recording their observations.  No perfect at/in any part of this endeavor {like every other human enterprise} - but it works and it works well and they have learned a lot that does not deserve the contrived ridicule the "Free corporate Marketers" have orchestrated. 

There is a base dishonesty about folks like Curry and commenters at her website - when they are basing all their thinking on an assumption that the science has been inferior.  They don't provide actual specifics regarding ~ our actual factual world full of knowledge and experience that climatologists and related field of researcher have been accumulated ~ but they sure do continue believing themselves. 

I think we've reach the point it's obvious that this is all about desperately clinging to one's fictitious world view (Free Market, no Anthropogenic Global Warming, no need to change a thing about the way we lead our business and lives.) and not about the state of our knowledge.  Fear, fear and anger overriding objectivity and reason.  OK I'll get off my soapbox and invite you to listen to some very smart hard working scientists tell their own story:

This is a work in progress, right now I'm at step one getting it up here to share the links:

Weather and Climate Summit - Day 3, Session 6 
Dr. Jennifer Francis, Rutger's University

Wacky Weather and Disappearing Arctic Sea Ice: Are They Connected?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 
Weather and Climate Summit - Day 5, Session 9 
The Arctic Paradox

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Weather and Climate Summit - Day 5, Session 
Jim White, University of Colorado

Climate Change Impacts Are Happening Faster and Faster- 
Greenland, Sea Level Rise and Some Atmospheric Chemistry

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Breckenridge Weather and Climate Summit Website:

Glen Gerberg Weather and Climate Summit 
The Weather and Climate Summit was established in 1985 to bring together television weathercasters and meteorologists from top U.S. and Canadian markets with leading scientists and researchers. This summit allows for dynamic and frequent interchange between the media and scientists in order to foster improved communication and collaboration between these diverse professions.  
The Weather and Climate Summit enables television meteorologists to learn more about upcoming technologies and research findings that will lead to improved public awareness. The Weather and Climate Summit also helps the attendees and scientists understand how each one operates, produces information, conducts research and communicates. The ultimate outcome of this summit is the establishment of improved media-scientist relationships that fosters continued dialogue for improved scientific communication to the public.
    Goal of Summit Participants
  • To learn about advanced technologies that can help improve weather forecasting and warning dissemination;
  • To understand the latest on the state of the climate and climate science research;
  • To better understand how extreme weather and climate change may impact their viewers;
  • Foster improved relationships with the speakers, scientists and subject matter experts.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Judith Curry and the Global Heat Distribution Engine

One thing that confuses me about Judith Curry is how she can co-author a paper like this

Impact of declining Arctic sea ice on winter snowfall
  1. Radley M. Horton
While the Arctic region has been warming strongly in recent decades, anomalously large snowfall in recent winters has affected large parts of North America, Europe, and east Asia.
Here we demonstrate that the decrease in autumn Arctic sea ice area is linked to changes in the winter Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation that have some resemblance to the negative phase of the winter Arctic oscillation. 
However, the atmospheric circulation change linked to the reduction of sea ice shows much broader meridional meanders in midlatitudes and clearly different interannual variability than the classical Arctic oscillation. 
This circulation change results in more frequent episodes of blocking patterns that lead to increased cold surges over large parts of northern continents. 
Moreover, the increase in atmospheric water vapor content in the Arctic region during late autumn and winter driven locally by the reduction of sea ice provides enhanced moisture sources, supporting increased heavy snowfall in Europe during early winter and the northeastern and midwestern United States during winter. We conclude that the recent decline of Arctic sea ice has played a critical role in recent cold and snowy winters.
Also see the story at: 
Unusual Weather: Arctic Sea Ice Decline May be Driving Snowy Winters Seen in Recent Years


And then she writes a dressed up op-ed like "No consensus on consensus" that totally skirts what is known, instead getting lost in a wormhole of rhetoric and misdirection.


Here you can find a lecture by Jennifer Francis another scientist who has studied this area extensively.  It's talks like her's that offer a chance to better appreciate how our planet operates and to come to grips with all that is known by climatologist, instead of allowing politically motivated folks to distract us with flimflam.

The Weekend Wonk: Jennifer Francis on Arctic Sea Ice

September 22, 2012

Here's how Peter Sinclair introduces it:
Dr. Jennifer Francis of Rutger’s Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences is featured in my sea ice wrap video, which should be out early in the week. 
Here is a lecture she gave in January of 2012. Longish, but worth dipping into, as  she summarizes some of the most recent research in regard to the effects of shrinking arctic ice on weather and climate in the temperate latitudes – the so-called “arctic paradox” so beloved by Fox News – “if there’s global warming, why are we having this record snow storm?”. 
What she told me in a recent interview was that the sea ice record is not something that we just pay attention to in September – there will, in fact, be reverberations that will make fall and winter “very interesting” around the globe.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Interestingly  Dr. Francis wrote an op-ed of her own in the Washington Post.  I found it much more enlightening that the jibber-jabber in "No consensus on consensus."

Washington Post ~ 09/21/2012

Shrinking Arctic ice and the wicked backlash on our weather

Guest Op-ed
Heat waves. Drought. Flooding. Cold spells. Wildfires. The climate system is changing before our very eyes, and there is no more glaring proof than the record-shattering loss of Arctic sea ice this summer. 
The National Snow and Ice Data Center announced Wednesday that the sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean has smashed the previous record minimum extent set in 2007 by a staggering 18 percent. The impacts of rising temperatures and melting ice extend beyond the far north to us in the United States, as we are poised to feel the weather-related backlash. 
The ice cover, only half of what it was only a few decades ago, is a stunning visual demonstration of the effects that increasing greenhouse gases, and resulting warming of the Earth, are having on the climate system... 

Hurricane Sandy in context - a collection of articles and links

I think it's time for some real Earth Observations and science.  The contrarians over at Judith's website talk endlessly, making claims, but always leading away from looking at Earth observations.  While exuding an attitude that, not knowing everything is the same as knowing nothing.  They seem to have no appreciation of our planet's climate as a huge Global Heat Distribution Engine.  Instead trusting that a sharp intellect can outsmart Earth processes.

Unfortunately, argue all you want about minute details, or the exactitude of measurements, or philosophizing about science...  the bottom line is that we have been doping our atmosphere, and it is impacting our planet in one direction.  Our climate is transitioning to a new state -  and the less we do to turn down the ongoing doping of our atmosphere the worse the disruptions to the world and life style {we've come to depend on} are going to get.

Since all eyes have been on Hurricane, turned superstorm, Sandy.  She's worth a review since she is symptomatic of the changes society's Grand Atmospheric Experiment is bringing to weather processes.   Below is a large selection of good articles that lead to authoritative sources that explain the dynamics at work:

Superstorm Sandy


How Does Climate Change Make Superstorms Like Sandy More Destructive?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Trenberth: Hurricane Sandy Mixes Super-Storm Conditions With Climate Change

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Scientist

Opinion: Super Storm Sandy

What role did climate change play in this week’s massive hurricane?
By  | October 31, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Why did Hurricane Sandy take such an unusual track into New Jersey?
Posted by: Dr. Jeff Masters, 4:33 PM GMT on October 31, 2012

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Frankenstorm: Has Climate Change Created A Monster?
by ADAM FRANK ~ October 28, 2012
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Rose and Curry Double Down on Global Warming Denial
Posted on 23 October 2012 by dana1981

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Hurricane Sandy had nothing to do with global warming

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Climate Crock of the Week with Peter Sinclair

New Video: 

Hurricane Sandy’s Double Whammy

November 5, 2012

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

2012 SkS News Bulletin #1: Hurricane Sandy & Climate Change
Posted on 31 October 2012 by John Hartz
This is a round-up of selected news articles and blog posts about Hurricane Sandy, its impacts on North America, and its relationship to climate change. This bulletin supplements the regular SkS weekly News Round-Up which is posted on Saturday of each week.

Sunday, Oct 28
Monday, Oct 29
Tuesday, Oct 30
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

2012 SkS News Bulletin #2: Hurricane Sandy & Climate Change
Posted on 4 November 2012 by John Hartz
This is the second installment of a a round-up of selected news articles and blog posts about Hurricane Sandy, its impacts on the Caribbean and North America, and its relationship to climate change. This bulletin supplements the regular SkS weekly News Round-Up which is posted on Saturday of each week. A key pragraph has been extracted verbatim from each article in order to provide insight into the article's content.  

Arriving atop fantastically warm water and aided by a full foot of sea-level rise during the last century, Hurricane Sandy is just the latest example of climate change’s impact on human society. Unless we rapidly phase out our use of fossil fuels, most Americans within shouting distance of an ocean will—in coming years—live behind the sort of massive levees and floodgates that mark Louisiana today.

As the Caribbean reaches the end of October – the second-to-last month of the Atlantic hurricane season – Sandy has caused significant material losses and claimed the lives of 44 people in Haiti, 11 in Cuba, two in the Dominican Republic, one in Jamaica and one in the Bahamas.
Caribbean Faces Increasing Fury of Storms by Patricia Grogg, Inter Press Service (IPS), Oct 29, 2912

Hurricane Sandy seems straight out of a Hollywood apocalyptic blockbuster. But a confluence of environmental and topographical characteristics helps explain its vast size, slow progress, storm surge and multiple methods of wreaking havoc on the coast and deep inland, scientists say.
The science behind Hurricane Sandy: a confluence of trouble by Neela Banerjee, Los Angeles Times, Oct 29, 2012 

But no president can cross Big Oil in the way that is required to defuse the climate crisis without the help of a powerful and sustained popular movement. If Hurricane Sandy contributes to building such a movement—and McKibben and his fellow activists at and allied organizations are launching a national tour shortly after Election Day that aims to do just that—America might still avoid the curse of Cassandra by heeding her warnings at last.
Hurricane Sandy as Greek Tragedy by Mark Hertsgaard, The Nation, Oct 30, 2012

Watching the images of Sandy leaving a path of destruction brings back memories of the day after Hurricane Andrew hit my home in Miami back in 1992. The state of shock as my parents and I approached our storm ravaged home is still fresh in my memory even 20 years later as I see the faces of those who are experiencing the same today.
Superstorm Sandy Reminds Us Why We Have to Care About Climate Change by Adrianna Quintero, The Huffington Post, Oct 31, 2012

By the time Hurricane Sandy hit the Northeast coast on Monday, upending lives across the Eastern half of the country, it had become a freakish hybrid of a large, late-season hurricane and a winter storm more typical of the middle latitudes. Though by no means unprecedented, that type of hybrid storm is rare enough that scientists have not studied whether it is likely to become more common in a warming climate.
Are Humans to Blame? Science Is Out by Justin Gillis, New York Times, Oct 31, 2012

But scientists agree on one point: Rising sea levels caused primarily by global warming could worsen the effects of storms such as Sandy, particularly when it comes to storm surge. And that means coastal communities throughout the United States must think about what they’ll need for protection from such storms.
Did climate change play a role in Sandy’s strength? by Erika Bolstad, McClatchy Newspapers, Oct 31, 2012

The images of a paralysed New York City at the mercy of Hurricane Sandy's wall of water have forced climate change on to the political agenda in the final week of the 2012 presidential election campaign. Even before Sandy made landfall political commentators were debating whether the storm would be better for Mitt Romney or Barack Obama. In any event it has brought forth statements from prominent Democrats and elected officials on climate change and spurred public debate about the neglected topic.
Sandy puts climate change back on the US election agenda by Suzanne Goldberg, The Gaurdian, Oct 31, 2012

Miller strongly disagreed with my discussion of the science revealing past patterns of extreme storminess in the Northeast and the science pointing to a rising human influence on some (but not all) kinds of extreme weather. The exchange is worth posting here now (Miller gave permission), to give you a sense of how intelligent people with related, if not identical, goals can interpret a large body of science very differently:
Two Views of a Superstorm in Climate Context by Andrew Revkin, Dot Earth, New York Times, Oct 31, 2012

"Folks, second year in a row the New York metro area has been [hit] by this stuff," said Todd, NBC News's Chief White House Correspondent and host of The Daily Rundown on MSNBC. "Let's not bury our heads in the sand when it comes to something has changed in the Atlantic. The climate has changed. It's called climate change, folks."

Up to now, New York's response to flood threats has been to build smaller-scale barriers around facilities to make them more resilient to flooding. A multibillion-dollar project to create a storm surge defense system hasn't been on the agenda. "The city has been very polite, and they agree that in the long term it will become a necessity," Bowman said. "But for now they say, not yet. They're focusing on resilience, solutions to small problems."
NYC flood was foreseen: Now what? by Alan Boyle, Cosmic Log,, Oct 31, 2012

Democrats have been AWOL on climate change, but Republicans have been even more recalcitrant. Their failure is odd, because in other areas of national security Republicans pride themselves on their vigilance. Romney doesn’t want to wait until he sees an Iranian nuclear weapon before acting, so why the passivity about climate change?
Will Climate Get Some Respect Now? by Nicholas D. Kristof, New York Times, Oct 31, 2012 

A huge storm barrels down on the United States, wreaking havoc with punishing winds, record flooding, heavy snowfall and massive blackouts. Is the main culprit climate change or a freak set of coincidences?
Climate change, or crap shoot? Experts weigh Sandy's causes by Julie Steenhuysen and Alister Doyle, Alertnet/Reuters, Oct 31, 2012

Climate science explains how global warming can make a superstorms like Sandy more destructive in several ways:

The evidence is not yet in for the East Coast in 2011 and 2012, but the general trends are increasingly clear. In its 2012 report on managing the risks of extreme events and disasters, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that "A changing climate leads to changes in the frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration, and timing of extreme weather and climate events, and can result in unprecedented extreme weather and climate events."
Climate change is real by Chris Field, Special to CNN, Nov 1, 2012

Earlier this week, New York's Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) issued a pointed statement on climate change and its role in the monstrous storm from which his state -- and many others -- will be recovering for months, and perhaps years, to come.
"It's a longer conversation, but I think part of learning from this is the recognition that climate change is a reality," Cuomo said. "Extreme weather is a reality. It is a reality that we are vulnerable."
Hurricane Sandy's Link To Climate Change: Does It Matter? by Tom Zeller Jr., The Huffington Post, Nov 1, 2012

I’ve tried this week, as sporadic Internet access allowed, to foster some productive discourse amid a media environment that seems dead-set on creating polarization. The two most vivid examples on my mind at the moment are “It’s Global Warming, Stupid,” a much-shared essay in Bloomberg Businessweek, and an effort by Anthony Watts, inspired by a ridiculous U.S. News Sandy-warming poll, to list scientists and commentators for and against global warming as the storm’s cause.
On Hurricanes, Presidents, Climate and One Clear Human Factor in the Sandy Disaster by Andrew Revkin, Dot Earth, New York Times, Nov 1, 2012

In a surprise announcement, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said Thursday that Hurricane Sandy had reshaped his thinking about the presidential campaign and that as a result he was endorsing President Obama.
Bloomberg Endorses Obama, Citing Climate Change by Raymond Hernandez, New York Times, Nov 1, 2012

As NCAR’s Gerald Meehl, a co-author of the study, explained to me by e-mail, it’s a lot easier to stabilize global temperatures by cutting carbon emissions than it is to stabilize sea-level rise. The carbon-dioxide that we’ve already loaded into the atmosphere will likely have effects on the oceans for centuries to come. “But with aggressive mitigation,” Meehl added, “you can slow down the rate of sea level rise, which buys time for adaptation measures.”
Can we stop the seas from rising? Yes, but less than you think. by Brad Plumer, Ezra Klein's Wonk Blog, Washington Post, Nov 1, 2012

Bloomberg Businessweek editor Josh Tyrangiel tweeted, "Our cover story this week may generate controversy, but only among the stupid."

Hurricane Sandy has broken the so-called “climate silence” of this year’s elections. The storm has thrown a wrench into campaign efforts, halting activities Monday and Tuesday as it became impossible to ignore the topic of climate change, which has penetrated the national dialogue.
Hurricane Sandy Fans Flames of Climate Change Debate by Rebecca Hanser, Inter Press Service (IPS), Nov 1, 2012

“While one storm ‘might have happened anyway’ in a mythical non-industrial world, the general level of weird weather (an amalgam of many events) is clearly caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gases,” says David Archer, a professor at the University of Chicago, in an email. “Like you could figure out that dice are loaded by tossing them a few times, more than just once.” (His book, The Long Thaw, is one of the best quick reads on climate change.)

On Tuesday, I posted some suggestions for how people could help the victims of Hurricane Sandy here in the United States. I neglected to mention the horrific suffering in impoverished Haiti, which was pummeled by Sandy’s devastating trajectory before she hit US shores.
Don't Forget Haiti by Peter Rothberg, The Nation, Nov 2, 2012

Those crazy, radical hippies at Bloomberg Businessweek have gone and done it. With the blunt, no-nonsense cover that likely already appeared on your Facebook feed or Twitter stream or Tumblr dashboard, Businessweek dared state with certainty what so many media outlets have nervously danced around in their coverage of Superstorm Sandy: It’s Global Warming, Stupid.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~