Global warming fingered as Superstorm Sandy supersizer

I can prove that global warming has nothing to do with these storms. In 2345 BCE there was a great flood. Man wasn't using the fossil fuels we are today and the earth would have been far cooler and more arctic ice would have existed. I'm pretty sure the great flood was far worse than "super storm Sandy" could ever have been.

The worst Altantic hurricane happened in 1780 followed my Mitch in 1998. The fact is, Sandy didn't even register on the scale of one of the worst hurricanes on record. If global warming was playing a pivotal role, then each year the storms would be worse and worse and easily be worse than the storms of hundreds of years ago.

If global warming is man made, how did we ever get out of the ice age? Man wasn't around to pollute the earth and yet it warmed. Scientists have also proved that the earth goes through warming and cooling phases.

If man is the source of global warming, we do what. Quit using fossil fuels so we dump electricity, automobiles, kill the cows and live in the dark ages? The fact is, even green energy causing issues, like wind turbines. The use of them slows the air current and thus the cooling effect it provides.

If we need to stop what we are doing, then I say those that are in favor take first steps and live in the dark ages. Once they prove it works, then the rest of the world could adopt it. All the tree huggers do is talk about what to do but they don't actually follow through with it themselves. Take Al Gore; he pollutes more than most non-green people do. I don't have a private jet and go all over the world in it. Sure he can plant trees to do carbon offsets but the fact is, he is polluting. His home is a huge polluter, so he wants others to conserve while he does not.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

Stay with me here...

Storms move along steep pressure gradients, typically caused by thermal differences. High pressure moves into areas of low pressure. A low-pressure system won't move west, east, north, or south without something pulling it along. If an increase in air temp throughout a given column of air above the polar regions reduces such gradients, blocking highs will become the norm. Such blocking highs would continue to cause continued buckling of the atmospheric flows, resulting in energy being shunted off in directions normally not seen.

Taken together, this is why the whole idea of "extreme" instead of "warm" weather is predicted by most climate models. With more energy in the system, it takes an even greater push to move highs along their merry way. This allows diversions of upper-air winds to carry tropical or polar air further into the temperate regions. Tropical air tends to carry moisture, polar air tends to be dry. In general, that means a pattern is formed and harder to break. That's not to say such things did not occur in the past. But should we just accept that by adding more energy to the system in a way the creates more equilibrium than before (polar areas are warming much more than tropical areas) is a good thing? It just creates a more sluggish climate that responds only to gross changes in energy, such as the changing from summer to winter, rather than smaller energy fluctuations. The climate works on a system of equalization, tropical to polar. Reducing that difference reduces variability and cements patterns. That's not a good thing.

wow, false alarm level of .5 is the treshold for getting published in the field of 'climate change'

So...

We are basing this on 1 hurricane. 1 is not a statistic. A trend of 1 is irrelevant. 1 is not a pattern.

Even better we are basing this on 1 freak hurricane on record!!! Going all the way back to the ancient year of 1851. Looking at the tsunami in japan which occurs roughly each 100 yrs (as the argument that they should have been prepared). So this could be a regular occurrence but we dont have the records.

So we have the possibility of a freak occurrence of non-freak events or as they say "A Series of Unfortunate Events". Something we all know if we have a really bad day. Or it could be the norm but with the complete lack of information to work with we dont know.

So I guess there could be a possible relation to a theory if said theory can be proven to scientific accuracy. But even if it could then it is just another possibility. And as a possibility it is not probable unless a few more happen to provide any trend data.

Or we can gather everyone around... turn off the lights... move the torch under our chins... turn them on as we say as fast as we can "MMCC co2 theory we all gonna die!!!!! Mwaaaaaahahahahahahahaha"

None of the climate models are 100% and I have been saying for years now, there is no such thing as man made global warming. What did I see in the Sunday Mail last night, an article with the headline,"Finally proof that there is NO global warming", it went on to state that the global temperatures are NOT rising, showed a nice pretty graph where the temperatures have levelled off for the past 15 years!!

There is no such thing as global warming, I stand by this and you will see more and more reports saying as much!

Then the question will be asked, why have we (meaning our governments) wasted billion of pounds and dollars on this rubbish and we continue to pay tax based on carbon!!!

Alarmists, go home and worry about something else instead of p!$$!ng away everyones tax money!

Lots of anonymice here

Is that because they've trolling or are not convinced of their views?