Bastardi: More Paris Madness – Pact ‘doesn’t mean a hill of beans as far as the threat to our coast’ from hurricanes
Look at this. I’ll try to be nice about it.
This is part of a slew of doomsday proclamations that have increased since the Paris situation. But this is another good example of why this is about economic considerations. Because something as bad as what happened in the 1940s — a railroad track of major hits in south Florida — is bound to happen again naturally.
Even if Donald Trump had stuck with the Paris climate accord, it doesn’t mean a hill of beans as far as the threat to our coast. And given factual past events, one would expect that.
The reason so many people are in harm’s way is because, overall, recent hurricanes have not been that bad, so people feel the risk is worth it.
In my hurricane forecast this year, I explain my idea on why we haven’t had the big powerhouses maintain intensity as they come to the coast, which of course means build, build, build, because you thumb your nose at nature, then start looking for something (or someone) to blame when she does what she naturally does. But this year looks different, and so the ignorance on display in the articles like the one above — and they are flying off the presses left and right since Trump chose to abandon the Paris climate accord — is startling.
I am sure the author did not read our hurricane write up because if that person did, he or she would have to conclude that all the resorts near Mar-a-Lago have a threat of getting devastated. It has nothing to do with signing a non-binding accord that economically is all pain and no gain for the United States. Trump wants to build in Florida, whether he is president or not. He shares the same risk as anyone else. It’s part of a long-standing patterns that, if looked at, would show the inherent risk.
Joe Bastardi is chief forecaster at WeatherBELL Analytics, a meteorological consulting firm, and contributor to The Patriot Post on environmental issues.