Climate Change – Global Warming: Open Letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon

They're on to me!

They’re on to me!

OPEN CLIMATE LETTER TO UN SECRETARY-GENERAL: Current scientific knowledge does not substantiate Ban Ki-Moon assertions on weather and climate, say 125-plus scientists.

Policy actions that aim to reduce CO2 emissions are unlikely to influence future climate. Policies need to focus on preparation for, and adaptation to, all dangerous climatic events, however caused

Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
H.E. Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General, United Nations
First Avenue and East 44th Street, New York, New York, U.S.A.
November 29, 2012

Mr. Secretary-General:

On November 9 this year you told the General Assembly: “Extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal … Our challenge remains, clear and urgent: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen adaptation to … even larger climate shocks … and to reach a legally binding climate agreement by 2015 … This should be one of the main lessons of Hurricane Sandy.”

On November 13 you said at Yale: “The science is clear; we should waste no more time on that debate.”

The following day, in Al Gore’s “Dirty Weather” Webcast, you spoke of “more severe storms, harsher droughts, greater floods”, concluding: “Two weeks ago, Hurricane Sandy struck the eastern seaboard of the United States. A nation saw the reality of climate change. The recovery will cost tens of billions of dollars. The cost of inaction will be even higher. We must reduce our dependence on carbon emissions.”

We the undersigned, qualified in climate-related matters, wish to state that current scientific knowledge does not substantiate your assertions.

The U.K. Met Office recently released data showing that there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 years. During this period, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations rose by nearly 9% to now constitute 0.039% of the atmosphere. Global warming that has not occurred cannot have caused the extreme weather of the past few years. Whether, when and how atmospheric warming will resume is unknown. The science is unclear. Some scientists point out that near-term natural cooling, linked to variations in solar output, is also a distinct possibility.

The “even larger climate shocks” you have mentioned would be worse if the world cooled than if it warmed. Climate changes naturally all the time, sometimes dramatically. The hypothesis that our emissions of CO2 have caused, or will cause, dangerous warming is not supported by the evidence.

The incidence and severity of extreme weather has not increased. There is little evidence that dangerous weather-related events will occur more often in the future. The U.N.’s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says in its Special Report on Extreme Weather (2012) that there is “an absence of an attributable climate change signal” in trends in extreme weather losses to date. The funds currently dedicated to trying to stop extreme weather should therefore be diverted to strengthening our infrastructure so as to be able to withstand these inevitable, natural events, and to helping communities rebuild after natural catastrophes such as tropical storm Sandy.

There is no sound reason for the costly, restrictive public policy decisions proposed at the U.N. climate conference in Qatar. Rigorous analysis of unbiased observational data does not support the projections of future global warming predicted by computer models now proven to exaggerate warming and its effects.

The NOAA “State of the Climate in 2008” report asserted that 15 years or more without any statistically-significant warming would indicate a discrepancy between observation and prediction. Sixteen years without warming have therefore now proven that the models are wrong by their creators’ own criterion.

Based upon these considerations, we ask that you desist from exploiting the misery of the families of those who lost their lives or properties in tropical storm Sandy by making unsupportable claims that human influences caused that storm. They did not. We also ask that you acknowledge that policy actions by the U.N., or by the signatory nations to the UNFCCC, that aim to reduce CO2 emissions are unlikely to exercise any significant influence on future climate. Climate policies therefore need to focus on preparation for, and adaptation to, all dangerous climatic events however caused.

Signed by:

Continue reading

#Sandy Makes Landfall October 29 2012 – Graphics

Sandy has made landfall as an Extratropical storm on the southern tip of New Jersey near Cape May and Ocean city. At landfall Sandy had Sustained winds of 90 mph and a central pressure of 940mb. Tropical Storm Force and Hurricane Force winds were felt for many hours. The National Hurricane Center has Sandy as a Post-Tropical Cyclone making landfall at 8:00 PM EDT Monday, October 29 2012 with winds of 80 mph and a central pressure of 946 located at 39.4N 74.5W. and moving WNW AT 23 MPH .[see note at bottom of post]

Below is the ONLY graphic from the Hurricane center of Sandy before landfall at 5:00 PM EDT Monday, October 29 2012. There is not a graphic at landfall at 8:00 PM EDT. Notice the location on the graphic 38.8N 74.4W and moving WNW at 28 mph as compared to the location at landfall from above 39.4N 74.5W. and moving WNW AT 23 MPH.

So the storm was moving at 23 mph at landfall, a decrease of 2 mph from the 5 pm report. Yet it took according to the Hurricane center 3 hours from the 5 pm report to make landfall at 8 pm, moving less than 34.4 miles at 23 miles and hour. Where as at 23 mph X 3 hours would have moved it 69 miles. I contend Hurricane Sandy made landfall between 6:15 and 6:30 pm as reported to my followers here, on facebook, and twitter as an Extratropical storm. Apples and Oranges, I know.

Here are Satellite images of Sandy During landfall from 6:15 PM EDT, 7:45 PM EDT and 8:15 PM EDT.

Sandy SAT 615 pm EDT 102912

Sandy SAT 745 pm EDT 102912

Sandy SAT 815 pm EDT 102912

Note – Landfall : The intersection of the surface center of a tropical cyclone with a coastline. Because the strongest winds in a tropical cyclone are not located precisely at the center, it is possible for a cyclone’s strongest winds to be experienced over land even if landfall does not occur. Similarly, it is possible for a tropical cyclone to make landfall and have its strongest winds remain over the water. Compare direct hit, indirect hit, and strike. source –

Many including myself thought from looking at data at the time that Hurricane Sandy made landfall between 6:15 and 6:30 PM EDT Monday October 29 2012; including some pro Mets. However the official time of landfall for Hurricane Sandy as released by the National Hurricane Center was at 8:00 PM EDT Monday October 29 2012. I will also point out that the National Hurricane Center tells us the same thing as the first link above from …. Now from observations, Hurricane Sandy or as it was called at landfall, Post-Tropical Cyclone SANDY, made landfall after the WHOLE EYE was on land. Not the leading edge. Not the center. The complete eye, at 8 PM EDT Monday October 29 2012

Hurricane #Sandy Making Landfall – 10/29/12

Currently – Winds: 90 mph | Pressure 940 mb | Location: 38.8N 74.4W (30 miles East-southeast of Cape May New Jersey and 40 miles South of Atlantic City New Jersey) | Moving Northwest at 28 mph. Tropical storm force winds extend out 485 miles and Hurricane force winds out 175 miles from the center.

Sandy is still off shore at this time. She is continuing to head to the north-northwest at 28 mph. Sandy is headed for Cape May New Jersey and the Delaware Bay area. Reminder: When we talk about landfall, we are speaking of the center of the storm. Sandy is large and as many of you know, her winds and rains have been felt much of the day. So the center is not that important.

Below shows Storm Radial Velocity measuring wind speed and Base Reflectivity Radar showing rain.