Mayor Bill de Blasio on CNN (January 25, 2016): "We are clearly living in an era of extreme weather. We're seeing storms like we've never seen before. If this one had been just a tenth of an inch deeper, it would have been the worst in New York City's history."
This is a classic example of how a political agenda can corrupt reason. Think about the contradiction within the mayor's statement: "storms like we've NEVER SEEN BEFORE" vs "would have been the worst." It took only one sentence for de Blasio to contradict himself. Turns out we have seen plenty of storms like this before. As a matter of fact, I've seen snow storms of varying depths every winter for my entire life. Snow is what the northeast gets in winter.
Here are the top ten record snowfalls in NYC:
- 26.9” on February 11-12, 2006
- 26.8" on January 22-23, 2016
- 25.8” on December 26-27, 1947
- 21.0" on March 12-14th, 1888
- 20.9” on February 25-26, 2010
- 20.2” on January 7-8, 1996
- 20.0” on December 26-27, 2010
- 19.8” on February 16-17, 2003
- 19.0” on January 26-27, 2011
- 18.1” on March 7-8, 1941 & January 22-24, 1935
Yet in the midst of all this "extreme weather," in 2013 NYC got only 26.1 inches for the entire winter season, In 2012 it was only 7.4 inches; in 2008 only 11.9; in 2007 only 12.4; and in 2002 only 3.5 inches. Clearly the case could be made that we are actually in an era of mild weather.
7 comments:
yet 60% of them are in this decade and 70% in the last 20 years.
Nowhere near enough data to draw a conclusion. There have also been some very mild winters in the past 20 years. Also, New York is not the standard for global climate.
60% this century, not decade. The globe is the standard and science says the we are heating up slow but sure. Remember, I don't think anyone has ever said we are not going to have winters, but I have read the science and to much CO2 in the atmosphere I do not believe is a good thing in the long run.
PS - your I'm not a robot is not working.
My point is, how does a 26 inch snowfall in NYC in anyway contribute to the case for global warming? It is also to point out how de Blasio's preconceived ideas about global warming so prejudiced his perspective that he contradicted himself in two short sentences -- and neither he nor his interviewer even realized it.
But he did not say a single storm. He used the plural storms. Perhaps he was speaking of the 60% over the past 13 years, plus Superstorm Sandy and some of the other tropical storms that have hit NY, direct or indirect this century. Now, in no way I am saying all these storms are a direct result of CO2 emissions, but that does not change the fact that to much CO2 in the atmosphere will strengthen some of these storms. Afterall, the warmer the air, the more evaporation, hence the more water to fall back down to earth upon us, and CO2 traps some of the heat reflecting back into the atmosphere, and the more CO2, the more heat gets trapped. Makes sense to me.
A politician being hypocritical? I'm sure I can find some on the other end of the spectrum being even more hypocritical. Part of their job, unfortunately.
You're missing my point completely, Tom. Mayor de Blasio is playing fast and loose with the term "extreme weather." We have not been collecting data long enough to know what the extremes are when it comes to weather. NYC didn't start recording snow depth totals until 1869. 146 years is a drop in the bucket when it comes to geologic time. Also, how do we know 3.2 inches in 2002 isn't an extreme in the other direction? How do we know that normal isn't 25 inches and anything below 12 inches is extreme in the opposite direction? The point is (computer models notwithstanding), we don't know any of this because we haven't been keeping records nearly long enough.
but nature has kept records....read the science. Even if the science is totally wrong, which it is not, I still see nothing wrong with wanting to clean our atmosphere of fossil fuel pollution and the best way to go about that is through government incentives to businesses and the population much like we did with acid rain. I think out of 146 years that 6 of the snow events have been in the past 13years might show something going on.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter at this point. The current majority in congress decided in Jan. 2009 that climate change is a left wing and world scientist conspiracy and dropped any plans to do anything about it. What's a shame is we spent all this money at NASA and NOAA to study our atmosphere and climate and now that we have some results it is all just being summarily dismissed in the name of another left wing conspiracy.
As I heard someone say not long ago, "you keep hearing "listen to the generals"". Except when they say climate change is a threat, then those listeners just ignore that. Maybe they mean listen when it's only for war.
by the way, I love the little graphic you have on the mayor.
Post a Comment