Rabbi Yonatan Neril, founder of Interfaith Center for Sustainable Development: 'We need to listen to what Harvey, Irma, Jose, and Katia are saying as messengers of God’s creation, planet earth. Something is out of balance in the way we are living, and the need to change is hitting us in the face.'
Neril: 'This is a huge wake up call for humanity that we need to change. It's no longer about recycling or getting a hybrid car. We need a fundamental reorientation of the way that we are living for sustainability.'
Homeland Security Advisor Tom Bossert: 'I will tell you that we continue to take seriously the climate change -- not the cause of it, but the things that we observe. And so there's rising flood waters -- I think one inch every 10 years in Tampa -- things that would require prudent mitigation measures. And what I said from the podium the other day, and what President Trump remains committed to, is making sure that federal dollars aren't used to rebuild things that will be in harm's way later or that won't be hardened against the future predicable floods that we see.'
“The shouting and screaming we hear today [about climate change boosting the strength of hurricanes] and the scientific efforts to support it all fall short on proving there is a link between warming of the atmosphere and our burning of fossil fuels,” Coleman wrote on his blog. The 82-year-old climate skeptic added: “Until they prove the basic foundation of their scientific position, the AlGorians are guilty of scientific fraud.”
Climate Depot’s Marc Morano said the heightened vitriol aimed at those who dispute the link between climate change and extreme weather events is a sign that the global warming narrative is losing steam with the public and policymakers.
“Activists have been frustrated with record number of polar bears, no acceleration of sea level, the Pause, no trends or declining trends in extreme weather and the public’s apathy,” said Mr. Morano, whose book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change” is slated to be released in February.
“Trump has added to all of that, and we are now seeing them blow their gaskets in frustration,” he said.
Climate Depot's Marc Morano statement on 2002 article: "Will they reclassify hurricanes from 50 years ago? 100? What about old tornadoes? Will they erase the Medieval Warm period again?!"
Let's get this straight: The National Hurricane center gets federal grant to study historical storms and presto -- Past storms are made stronger based on 'we feel' guesses, 'best call' and 'best-estimates' while they admit 'uncertainty.' 'We feel the Category 5 winds at least made it to the coastline,' Max Mayfield said. 'We feel'?! Hurricane science is now reduced to 'we feel' estimates!? A cynical person might suspect that the National Hurricane Center is revising the past to show increasing hurricane strength in 'global warming' era. Similar 'revisions' occurred with the Medieval Warm Period, The Pause, Sea Levels, Global temperature data, etc."
Max Mayfield, director of the center in 2002: "We'll always have some uncertainty," Mayfield said, "but we made our best call." -- "We feel the Category 5 winds at least made it to the coastline."
Revisions occurred "after receiving federal grants to study the intensity and tracks of all hurricanes since 1910."
"Officials emphasized they were not working with new data, but rather taking another look at old data under a 'best-estimate' approach."
"Other Category 4 hurricanes may also be upgraded."
"According to these and other authors, rising greenhouse gas levels are at least partly to blame for the occurrence and severity of Harvey, and probably for Hurricane Irma as well. But after-the-fact guesswork is not science. If any would-be expert really knew long ago that Harvey was on its way, let him or her prove it by predicting what next year’s hurricane season will bring. Don’t hold your breath: Even the best meteorologists in the world weren’t able to predict the development and track of Hurricane Harvey until a few days before it hit..."
"We should not assume that any time we have pleasant weather, we were going to have it anyway, but a storm is unusual and proves greenhouse gases control the climate. A settled theory makes specific predictions that can, in principle, be tested against observed data. A theory that only yields vague, untestable predictions is, at best, a work in progress. The climate alarmists offer a vague prediction: Hurricanes may or may not happen in any particular year, but when they do, they will be more intense than they would have been if GHG levels were lower. This is a convenient prediction to make because we can never test it. It requires observing the behaviour of imaginary storms in an unobservable world. Good luck collecting the data.
Climate scientists instead use computer models to simulate the alternative world. But the models project hundreds of possible worlds, and predict every conceivable outcome, so whatever happens it is consistent with at least one model run."
'When opinion writers tacitly assume all good weather is natural and GHGs only cause bad weather, or claim to be able to predict future storms, but only after they have already occurred, I reserve the right to call their science unsettled.'