Policymakers and the media tell us that extreme weather was worse in 2012. But according to the National Weather Service, tornado activity in 2012 was “among some of the least active years in the past 60 years.”(Carbin, 2012) Major hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin was less than normal, with no Category 4 or 5 hurricanes forming in 2012, according to the Tropical Meteorology Project at Colorado State University. And 2012 doesn’t even rank in the top ten for number of days above 100 degrees:
Policymakers and the media tell us that increases in atmospheric CO2 will lead to global warming, but a recent study highlighted by Watts Up With That concludes there is no statistical evidence this is happening. Policymakers and the media tell us that burning fossil fuels will lead to more and stronger hurricanes, but one of the leading researchers of tropical weather concludes otherwise:
Our hurricane research extending over many years indicates that Atlantic hurricane variability is driven almost exclusively by natural changes. The potential influence of human‐induced CO2 increase on Atlantic hurricane frequency and intensity is likely to be negligible. As extensive and tragic as Sandy’s 2012 destruction has been, it and other destructive hurricanes in recent decades are not beyond the range of what is known to be the natural variability of the atmospheric‐ocean system. What is more amazing than Sandy’s tragic and extremely damaging flooding, at least from an intellectual point‐of‐view, is the number of knowledgeable people and prominent government and private citizens who have concluded that Sandy’s destruction was largely the result of human‐induced climate change resulting from our over‐abundant use of fossil fuels. Our analysis of Atlantic hurricane activity variations over the last century does not support such a conclusion.(Gray & Klotzbach, 2012)
And I’m wondering, why? What motivates policymakers, the media, and others to perpetuate the myth of anthropogenic global warming (AGW)?
One motivation is certainly the advancement of an anti-coal agenda. If policymakers were serious about an AGW crisis, they would be proposing more stringent regulations for both agriculture and suburban development. Why is there no Federal outcry over these supposed contributors to global warming? Because solving a problem that doesn’t even exist has never been the goal. The goal has always been regulating the coal industry into oblivion. What’s so insidious about this is that they don’t even have to actually enact the regulations (which may not stand up under the scrutiny of the judicial system anyway). Just the threat of regulations is enough to keep utilities from investing in coal-fired electrical generation. Returns on investment in the utility industry aren’t high enough to support the added risk of potential cost escalation or out-and-out loss of investment.
A preoccupation with anthropogenic global warming for a political agenda, despite all evidence to the contrary, diverts resources — time and money — away from more important climate research. Improving both short-term weather and long-term climate prediction models would have great value, not only in dollars saved, but in lives saved. Current policymakers’ insistence on AGW as a call for alarm isn’t just a war on coal; it’s a war on legitimate climate science itself.
Carbin, G. NOAA, NWS. (2012). United States tornadoes of 2012. Retrieved from website: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/wcm/2012/2012-NOAA-NWS-tornado-facts.pdf
Gray, W., & Klotzbach, P. (2012). U.S. hurricane damage – can rising levels of CO2 be associated with Sandy’s massive destruction? Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Retrieved from http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/Includes/Documents/Publications/grayklotzbach2012.pdf