Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New York Times: Will Climate (Change) Get Some Respect Now?
New York Times ^ | October 31, 2012 | Nicholas D. Kristof

Posted on 11/01/2012 3:45:20 AM PDT by Zakeet

President Obama and Mitt Romney seemed determined not to discuss climate change in this campaign. So thanks to Hurricane Sandy for forcing the issue: Isn’t it time to talk not only about weather, but also about climate?

It’s true, of course, that no single storm or drought can be attributed to climate change. Atlantic hurricanes in the Northeast go way back, as the catastrophic “snow hurricane” of 1804 attests. But many scientists believe that rising carbon emissions could make extreme weather — like Sandy — more likely.

“You can’t say any one single event is reflective of climate change,” William Solecki, the co-chairman of the New York City Panel on Climate Change, told me. “But it’s illustrative of the conditions and events and scenarios that we expect with climate change.”

In that sense, whatever its causes, Sandy offers a window into the way ahead.

[Snip]

I was schooled in the far-reaching changes under way several years ago by Eskimos in Alaska, who told me of their amazement at seeing changes in their Arctic village — from melting permafrost to robins (for which their Inupiat language has no word), and even a (shivering) porcupine. If we can’t see that something extraordinary is going on in the world around us, we’re in trouble.

[Snip]

“For the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change,” James E. Hansen, a NASA climate scientist, recently wrote in The Washington Post.

Politicians have dropped the ball, but so have those of us in the news business. The number of articles about climate change fell by 41 percent from 2009 to 2011, according to DailyClimate.org.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: climate; environment; globalwarming; sandy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 next last

You right wing nuts should quit your hateful agenda of denying the obvious ... cause I learned that we need a carbon tax from the Eskimos in Alaska when they showed me a shivering porcupine ... and if you can't see that something extraordinary is going on in the world around us, then we're in trouble!

1 posted on 11/01/2012 3:45:26 AM PDT by Zakeet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
You can’t say any one single event is reflective of climate change,” William Solecki, the co-chairman of the New York City Panel on Climate Change, told me.

Well, there's your answer right there.

So shut up about it.

2 posted on 11/01/2012 3:48:37 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Yea, let’s talk about the cold front from the North that stalled Sandy and drove the storm inland.


3 posted on 11/01/2012 3:50:51 AM PDT by CrappieLuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

I just released some methane into the atmosphere.


4 posted on 11/01/2012 3:51:03 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

The only respect climate change will get is from Al Gore who is trying desperately to recoup millions of dollars he invested in this hoax. This global warming scam has been debunked by so many scientists and meteorologists that the few left who believe it look like idiots. And most who support it have some kind of monetary reason to keep perpetuating the hoax.


5 posted on 11/01/2012 3:54:12 AM PDT by ImNotLying (The MSM bears a close resemblance to the world's oldest profession!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va

I SO believe in climate change. Yesterday I didn’t have to wear a coat; today I did. Freaky.


6 posted on 11/01/2012 3:54:22 AM PDT by MayflowerMadam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Liberals, please do your fair share to end climate change: stop breathing.


7 posted on 11/01/2012 3:54:26 AM PDT by oblomov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Nope no respect for Climate Change Liars here!

Mel


8 posted on 11/01/2012 3:54:46 AM PDT by melsec (Once a Jolly Swagman camped by a Billabong....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
Respect in that all of the scamming vermin in the organized crime syndicate called globull warming are prosecuted and jailed for the largest hoax to ever be perpetrated on Humans... respecting the rope they use to hang them with... or 4 inch steel cable in fat al gore's case.

LLS

9 posted on 11/01/2012 4:00:38 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (OUR GOVERNMENT AND PRESS ARE NO LONGER TRUSTWORTHY OR DESERVING OF RESPECT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
“For the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change,” James E. Hansen, a NASA climate scientist, recently wrote in The Washington Post.

Whenever Jim Hansen, a political hack, talks about "climate" change, he really means man-caused climate change, specious reasoning.

Yes, there is and will continue to be climate change on Earth, Mars, Venus, and other planets in our solar system. The cause of climate change is the Sun.

Other than foolish and scientifically illiterate politicians and hacks like Hansen who want to blame mankind, there is no real, meaningful evidence that mankind is a factor in natural climate change. Look outside, the only greenhouse gas is water vapor in the form of clouds. The connection between carbon dioxide and weather change cannot be made because there is none, except by alchemists.

10 posted on 11/01/2012 4:02:50 AM PDT by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va

Ah Ha! So you are the one!


11 posted on 11/01/2012 4:03:11 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

If climate change was real, we should expect extended summers and shorter winters.

It hasn’t happened. There is no anthropogenic factor that drives climate on earth big enough to have a global impact.

No - what liberals do in supporting this scam is to take away our freedoms - to dress as we want, live as we want, work where want and vacation where they want.

Its not about protecting the environment; that’s merely a cover for our lives being under the thumb of benevolent commissars and bureaucrats.

A free country doesn’t need more central planning and regimentation from Washington; it needs more personal choice and freedom.

Now you know why Nicholas Kristof wants Big Government to keep tabs on us.


12 posted on 11/01/2012 4:03:11 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

>> I was schooled in the far-reaching changes under way several years ago by Eskimos in Alaska, who told me of their amazement at seeing changes in their Arctic village — from melting permafrost to robins (for which their Inupiat language has no word), and even a (shivering) porcupine. If we can’t see that something extraordinary is going on in the world around us, we’re in trouble.

“Proving” theories by anecdote instead of experiment is not doing science. At least not in *my* universe — maybe in Manhattan that’s how it works.


13 posted on 11/01/2012 4:05:13 AM PDT by Nervous Tick ("You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Get ready, people. If Romney wins, “climate change”, the homeless, and a bunch of other stuff is going to make a HUGE comeback in the news.


14 posted on 11/01/2012 4:07:50 AM PDT by cdcdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
Folks here in New Jersey are comparing Hurricane Sandy to the destruction left by the Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944 (this was before they named these storms). Did people back in 1944 blame hurricanes on "climate change," too?

I came across an interesting item when doing some research this morning. Hurricane Irene was apparently the first hurricane to make landfall in New Jersey since 1903. I didn't believe this at first, but apparently every other major storm since then either made landfall after declining to a tropical storm or made landfall elsewhere while causing widespread damage in New Jersey.

Does anyone think the jack@sses at the New York Times will mention this sort of thing?

15 posted on 11/01/2012 4:16:33 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va

“I just released some methane into the atmosphere.”

Was it SBD? (silent but deadly)


16 posted on 11/01/2012 4:17:27 AM PDT by ImNotLying (The MSM bears a close resemblance to the world's oldest profession!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

The funny thing is, if you go to Wikipedia’s current page on Ice Ages, the latest effect on climate attributed to Mankind is... We’ve forestalled the next period of glaciation. (You know, Chicago under a mile of ice, maybe a few thousand humans left alive on the planet...)

Seems like a good thing to me!


17 posted on 11/01/2012 4:23:35 AM PDT by Paul R. (We are in a break in an Ice Age. A brief break at that...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Correction there ... that's Hurricane Sandy, not Irene. Irene had weakened to a tropical storm by the time it reached New Jersey in 2011.
18 posted on 11/01/2012 4:32:18 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
You can’t say any one single event is reflective of climate change ... it’s illustrative of the conditions and events and scenarios that we expect with climate change.

Ahhhhh, a bit of reality juxtaposed with smooth spin. He is right, no single storm indicates any kind of long term tend. However, they are still basing all of their " the sky is falling" sales pitch on computer models, not reality. Models aren't reality, especially when you take them outside their nominal inputs. In other words, when you try to use them to be predictive of situations with input well beyond any known input set. Then you have absolutely no real world data to anchor them too, no way at all of verifying their behavior. Trust me, grin, I'm involved professionally with large scale complex computer models every day, I know their usefulness and their limitations. Oh, and to make the gw, crowd's argument even more ludicrous, we now know they have been fudging, falsifying, and cherry-picking their data - this by their own admission in that series of emails that came out. I would have thought anyone and everyone would be too embarrassed to associate themselves with the dead-horse of gw. Guess maybe they are trolling, seeing if there is any life (ie money) left in it...

19 posted on 11/01/2012 4:33:43 AM PDT by ThunderSleeps (Stop obama now! Stop the hussein - insane agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Isn’t it time for lefty network reporters and execs to stop buying houses on the water-front?

Hypocrites all.


20 posted on 11/01/2012 4:36:40 AM PDT by cgbg (No bailouts for New York and California. Let them eat debt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Exactly. Just picture the kind of loser who writes op-ed pieces for the NY Times for a living. He's sitting there at home in the dark in New York City, he hasn't had his Starbucks latte for several days, and he doesn't believe in God so he can't attribute his misfortune to any kind of Divine circumstances. He's a loser who has to blame somebody for his circumstances, so he can't even blame it on the random happenstances of nature. He also has a pathological obsession with Big Government, so he uses whatever specious evidence he finds and constructs a "problem" that only "government regulation" can solve.

New York City is filled with @ssholes like this.

21 posted on 11/01/2012 4:37:51 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Let’s load up Central Park with copperheads and alligators and see if they survive.


22 posted on 11/01/2012 4:42:40 AM PDT by sergeantdave (The FBI has declared war on the Marine Corps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

When we have colder than cold winters they either say you can’t blame one event, or some go out of their way to claim it’s STILL global warming.


23 posted on 11/01/2012 4:42:48 AM PDT by CommieCutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CommieCutter
The Marxist climate industry changed the nomenclature for this thing several years ago. It used to be called "global warming," but after several historic winters in recent years in the Eastern U.S. -- including one winter day back in the early 2000s when Al Gore showed up in New York City to give a speech on "global warming" where it ended up being the coldest day on record for that date in NYC -- the term was changed to "climate change" so that each and every minor weather phenomenon could be traced to some kind of pernicious man-made origin. When it's hotter than hell in the summer, it's attributable to "climate change," and when it's frigid in the winter, it's also attributable to "climate change."

And when the air temperature, humidity and barometric pressure matches the historical averages exactly on any given date ... well, that's an indication of "climate change," too.

24 posted on 11/01/2012 4:47:45 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Sandy happened in late October. I doubt the ocean or air temps were higher than they’ve ever been during a hurricane.

BTW...some theorize that using a nuke, to HEAT the area above the eye could reduce the power of a hurricane. Hmmm.

Finally, all climate alarmists tell us the poles are warming..not the equator. Guess what causes weather? Temperature differential. You know, when the weather man talks about a COLD front moving in. If the poles were warming, we’d have less differential and less severe weather.

The idiots in this write-up attribute weather to a process similar to water boiling in a pot...where turning up the heat makes it boil faster. Its simplistic and made for the masses.but hardly scientific.


25 posted on 11/01/2012 4:53:13 AM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Hey, here’s an idea. All lunatics who think man causes climate change, put a plastic bag over your head, tape it up so it is sealed nice and tight and just leave it there. PROBLEM SOLVED!


26 posted on 11/01/2012 4:55:10 AM PDT by New Jersey Realist (America: home of the free because of the brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Climate change: is it global warming or global cooling? Is it a result of human activity? Is the evidence overwhelming or incontrovertible?


27 posted on 11/01/2012 5:02:40 AM PDT by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Okay. TX, OK and LA will turn off the spigots to the oil pipelines heading north. The northeastern states can save all the carbon emissions. They better hope that globull warming is true this winter.


28 posted on 11/01/2012 5:05:44 AM PDT by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

The clowns that promote and believe this crap have a responsibility to sell their cars and disconnect their homes from the grid.


29 posted on 11/01/2012 5:15:43 AM PDT by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

So, when did you stop beating your wife?

Same question, right? Premise is WRONG.


30 posted on 11/01/2012 5:16:58 AM PDT by CincyRichieRich (Keep your head up and keep moving forward!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

We should ask Nicky Kristof if we should just bulldoze away all the destruction on the Jersey and New York coasts. After all, it would be stupid to rebuild if these hurricanes are going to be regular events because of global warming.


31 posted on 11/01/2012 5:18:10 AM PDT by Oldhunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

The fact that they don’t shows that they are simply deriving their righteousness from their faith in their advocacy, not even from their faith in their own works.

Probably not many of them would even accept the concept that “global warming” is simply a vehicle to collectivise and control people.

The people they support would NEVER have malevolent motives, because... well, “because I’m a good person and _I_ would never support someone with malevolent motives...so, if I support them, they are benevolent...”


32 posted on 11/01/2012 5:19:38 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Has anyone ever seen Al Gore and Chicken Little in the same room at the same time?

I thought not.


33 posted on 11/01/2012 5:21:44 AM PDT by Humble Servant (Work for the most conservative one in the race, and keep up the pressure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

It is fairly well known that the vortexial suction produced by the smooth solid canyons of tall Manhattan structures induced Sandy to veer vectorially northwesteward.

Manhattan caused the northward moving storm to veer inland at New Jersey.


34 posted on 11/01/2012 5:26:38 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Present failure and impending death yield irrational action))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

If the moon were in a different position (not full), the storm surge would have been negligible and the damage would be nominal.

Therefore, we need a moonlight tax.


35 posted on 11/01/2012 5:35:57 AM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

“For the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change,” James E. Hansen, a NASA climate scientist, recently wrote in The Washington Post.”

Well James, it could be explained by the fact thay you’ve quietly revised past temperature datasets (GISS) downward, multiple times...


36 posted on 11/01/2012 5:43:43 AM PDT by JPJones (I wish the buck(s) WOULD stop with me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImNotLying

A one cheek sneak.


37 posted on 11/01/2012 5:46:37 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
Repeat after me: No single storm can be attributed to climate change.

That should stop the vast sea of NONSENSE that the "anthropogenic global warming" lobby is throwing at us over Sandy.

CONTRIBUTE or WORK to help those affected by the storm!!! PRAY for them!!!! But don't spout useless nonsense in the face of this terrible storm!!!!

38 posted on 11/01/2012 5:49:04 AM PDT by Honorary Serb (Kosovo is Serbia! Free Srpska! Abolish ICTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va

I got an earful from a ‘Weather Scientist’ that Sandy PROVIDES conclusive proof of AGW and, anyway, the concensus among ‘scientists’ is that AGW is really, really true. Man is destroying the planet. AND, this is backed by a review of research data done by UCLA climate skeptics. Well, it turns out that the PRELIMINARY report based on a review of about 2% of the data (e.g. 2 readings out of 100) - says the analysis looks okay - but offers no real conclusion.

It does not address all the falsified data from University of East Anglia, NASA, etc. nor the 33K+ scientists who say AGW is unproven, nor does it address the exclusion of temperature readings from northern regions or from locations where exhaust gases, reflected heating from enclosed, sun-lit sensors, etc. that give inflated readings as well as recent analysis that shows temperatures have been flat for the last decade or more.

AGW is still unproven.


39 posted on 11/01/2012 5:56:46 AM PDT by NHResident
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Even if the climate was affected by man, why would I want the buffoons in Washington doing anything about it?


40 posted on 11/01/2012 6:04:40 AM PDT by Brett66 (Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Yes, the climate changed; it changed from sunny fall weather to a big storm. Storms happen.


41 posted on 11/01/2012 6:08:08 AM PDT by NRA1995 (I'll cling to my religion, cigars and guns till they're pried from my cold dead fingers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
Will Climate (Change) Get Some Respect Now?

I think global climate change should get the respect it deserves but not the respect it wants. Sincere respect does need to be solicited.

42 posted on 11/01/2012 6:10:36 AM PDT by MosesKnows
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
But many scientists believe that rising carbon emissions could make extreme weather — like Sandy — more likely.

The problem is, they have been saying that for 20 years. A couple of years ago, I went and got the data from the National Hurricane center and found that there has been no increase in the number and/or intensity of hurricane activity in recent decades The data went back a hundred and fifty years.

43 posted on 11/01/2012 6:15:53 AM PDT by JaguarXKE (If my Fluffy had a puppy, it would look like the puppy Obama ate!r)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Climate change is real! People wake up!

You watch... it’s going to keep getting colder probably for the next three months or so... it will be so cold in some areas of the US that the rain will literally freeze before it hits the ground! Mark my words!

Then... it’s going to start heating up! In some places it will get to over 100 degrees!! And then you’ll know the meaning of global warming buddy! It’ll be so hot!...seereeuss!


44 posted on 11/01/2012 6:43:10 AM PDT by MeOnTheBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Top experts say: The climate like stock prices will vary.


45 posted on 11/01/2012 6:48:18 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Geezz....these people at the NY Times...get a clue

Reasons why this storm was so impactful (had nothing to do with climate change):

1 - Came into the coast from west to east...allowed for maximum tidal surge
2 - Tropical cyclone phased with Tropical jet stream
3 - During the lows transformation to extra tropcal, it merged with a low level low riding up a cold front, allowing for the low to phase with the polar jet stream
4 - As the low became extra tropical, it's wind fields spread out....and the low became larger...

The storm stretched from Greenland to Illinois to the Caribbean....almost 20% of the lower 48 was covered....simply incredible.....phases (connected with) both the tropical and polar jet streams (notice the northern clouds stretching from Greenland and wrapping into the storm and the to the south, the clouds wrapping in from Florida and points south )....the jet streams are the conveyors of energy from the northern and southern latitudes....when they collide all hell breaks loose.....the main reason for Sandy being so large and powerful.....


46 posted on 11/01/2012 6:49:06 AM PDT by PigRigger (Donate to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org - The Troops have our front covered, let's guard their backs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Great summary of a bizarre and wretched phenomenon.


47 posted on 11/01/2012 6:49:40 AM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PigRigger

whoops....that would be “came into the coast from east to west”


48 posted on 11/01/2012 6:53:11 AM PDT by PigRigger (Donate to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org - The Troops have our front covered, let's guard their backs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: PigRigger

I’ll give “climate change” the respect it deserves: NONE!


49 posted on 11/01/2012 7:13:49 AM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet; All
AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low
50 posted on 11/01/2012 7:54:51 AM PDT by gura (If Allah is so great, why does he need fat sexually confused fanboys to do his dirty work? -iowahawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson