Tornadoes Not Caused By Climate Change
    By Hank Campbell | April 30th 2011 12:42 PM | 15 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments


    We are not alone for I see a wave of other former climate change believers are now demanding that politicians and law makers have the leading scientists and especially the unconscionable leading news editors, subjected to criminal charges for knowingly sustaining the criminal exaggerations of the CO2 mistake for the last 25 years. It is now appearing that issuing CO2 death threats to billions of children unnecessarily has not gone unnoticed and unlike Bush getting away with his false war in Iraq, the false war of climate change will sooner or later be dealt with in the courts. Treason charges for leading a country to a false war is one option now being looked at as politicians always need an enemy to blame.
    And keep in mind that it was the scientists themselves that made environmental protection necessary in the first place when they supposedly polluted the planet with their evil chemicals and cancer causing pesticides and so how ironic is it that we bowed like fools to our Gods of science for 25 years of “unstoppable warming”?
    Scientists are not gods and don’t forget that scientists also produced cruise missiles, cancer causing chemicals, land mine technology, nuclear weapons, germ warfare, cluster bombs, strip mining technology, Y2K, Y2Kyoto, deep sea drilling technology and now climate control. Proof of consensus not being real is the fact that scientists did not march in the streets when IPCC funding was pulled, the EPA was castrated and Obama’s not even mentioning the “crisis” in his state of the union speech. Consensus was a myth because if it were true, the consensus scientists declaring a climate emergency would act like it was an emergency and demand their CO2 mitigation be taken seriously. We believed a handful of lab coat consultants who said we could CONTROL the planet’s temperature and prevent it from boiling. Pure insanity as history will call this modern day witch burning. The new denier is anyone still believing voters will vote YES to taxing the air to make the weather colder. Not going to happen.
    REAL planet lovers are happy and relieved a crisis was averted and real planet lovers don't hold scientists as Gods and bow to politicians promising to make colder and lower the seas and scare kids with such doomsday glee.
    Stay tuned. Call the courthouse.

    The people who wrote the article and those who were quoted really need to get out more and look at the bigger picture.

    As everyone keeps saying ad nauseum - your cannot blame one tornado on climate change, unless it is part of a pattern of related weather events. One case of influenza in isolation does not mean an epidemic, unless it is one of ten thousand cases in one town. A huge number of tornadoes, worse than past La Nina's - in the context of all the record weather disasters around the world - that certainly suggests something is changing in the climate.

    For most rational people it is obvious that all the weather disasters we're seeing would not be such disasters or so widespread if not for global warming. Makes sense. There's a whole lot more energy moving about in the atmosphere these days, as well as a whole lot more water being shifted around in the air - just waiting to be dumped.

    Those sort of articles are probably written by people who don't want anyone to do anything to mitigate climate change - or who mistakenly want to give comfort to those with vested interests in continuing to pollute our air.

    Captcha is 'social torentem' - ha!

    There is such a thing as 'loading the dice'. Each weather event now forms in the context of an atmosphere with more energy and capable of holding more water vapour. For example, there was record spring heat ahead of the cold front that brought the tornadoes. It's hardly a surprise when an atmosphere that has trapped extra energy, and is capable of concentrating more water vapour in particular locations, is demonstrating an ability to produce more extreme precipitation events (and floods), droughts, and exceptional temperatures. The visible manifestiation of this climate disruption to individual people? Exceptional weather, more frequently.

    The planet is a "heat engine". Weather redistributes the heat around the globe.
    Extra energy trapped from the sun doesn't make it warmer as fast as it makes the engine of the weather spin faster. Tornadoes are just cogs in a giant machine for redistributing the suns wealth. Perhaps that's what libertarians can't stand! Weather is spinning faster because, as was predicted, CO2 is really great at making the atmosphere opaque to infrared, and keeps the suns energy from infrared light in the night time.

    Anti regulatory zealots who can't stomach the implications of the "one planet theory" that implies some finite resources might need to be regulated, are as pathetic as the old soviet ideologues who denied genetic evolution.

    Unfortunately it's not just environmentalist marketing that is preparing this meme. The same idea is promoted e.g. by Kevin Trenberth

    who finds it "irresponsible" not to talk about man-made climate change in the context of tornadoes. This fearmongering business has become a domain of lies and fabrications many years ago and it is only up to the personal strength of the stomach how obvious lie a climate activist is ready to spread.

    Everyone in the environmentalist movement has a somewhat different threshold how far he's ready to go but the qualitative fact that they're immoral liars and crooks is shared by the whole movement.

    Lubos, you do enjoy smearing people with totally unfounded insinuations don't you?

    From the National Academy of Sciences:
    "Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested, and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small. Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts. This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities."

    We have an atmosphere that is evidentially trapping extra energy, and the primary cause is very clearly the forced increase in grenhouse gases, as shown by direct observation and by the fingerprint pattern of the warming. Weather is the result of the redistribution of energy around the globe. So... why on earth, seeing as the amount of energy to be redistrubuted is increasing, would the weather stay the same? Really rather basic physics.

    Quite how the extra energy affects particular weather types is harder to determine - in the case of tornadoes, it may increase the frequency, decrease the frequency, increase the severity, decrease the severity, or change the locations in which tornadoes are experienced. With increased energy to play with in the lower atmosphere (the warm air that is pushed up over the cold fronts), more severe outcomes are certainly plausible. No scientist is saying they know just how the increased energy is affecting tornado distribution/intensity, but people need to wake up to the fact that the weather they 'always knew' is changing. It is irresponsible to believe that it won't. The one thing you can say with certainty is that the with our forced increase of the amount of energy to distribute around the world, the weather cannot remain the same as it has been in the past.

    Dear Skywatcher, your academy of sciences is producing pretty much the same politicized rubbish about this issue as thousands of other average corrupt scientists in the world. What do you exactly expect when you quote some documents of this organization? That I will be impressed? Well, I am not, it's rubbish.

    Your comment has nothing to do with mine. I have discussed Trenberth and tornadoes, and so did Hank.

    My article linked above shows that if there's been a change - very small one - it was a *decrease* of intense tornadoes in the last 50 years. That's also what the science predicts. See

    Your writing about all these issues is pure garbage driven by your fanatical climate bigotry. There is no new threat whatsoever that would be linked to climate change.

    nice rant and personal insults! I wish I was as fanatical as you are, then it would save me from the trouble of having to deal with reality and physics. The reality is endorsed by every relevant major academic institution around the world, of which the NAS is just one. The reality is about 4% extra water vapour and higher temperatures in the lower troposphere (Alabama had daily record highs on April 27th), nice ingredients for storms. As I stated before the impact on this particular flavour of extreme weather (tornadoes) is not entirely clear, but to claim without evidence that there can be no link is rather blindly hopeful. The link between higher and more intense precipitation and global warming is much easier (remember that extra 4% water vapour) and has been demonstrated many times, including recently in Nature. There's really no point in being an ostrich about the changes in weather in a warming world, or in being abusinve on an internet comments board, but hey, whatever rocks your boat!

    The link between Katrina and climate change is well established. Your statement above makes it look like you have some doubt.

    Odd, Al Gore later retracted it and said he did not mean to establish correlation-causation.   There are zero hurricane experts who agreed with him.   Unfortunately, in 2005-06, when environmental mullahs controlled the movement, they declared jihad on the actual hurricane experts who disagreed with Gore, carpet-bombing them with emails, phone calls, hate mail, trying to get them fired, etc.

    You know, supposedly the kind of thing people who care about the environment don't do, because they love humanity so much.
    Will science ever recover the respect lost from the climate change mistake?

    It isn't a mistake, anyone who thinks pollution is not bad doesn't understand simple physics.   They simply let cheerleaders take the place of a few scientists and they made silly claims that had no basis in evidence.   Regardless, it's happening and the more people on the planet, the more it will happen, so we need to find a solution.   
    In one sense ALL weather events which we are observing are due to climate change. Think about it. The average temperature of the planet has gone up nearly 1 C over the past 150 years. The climate has changed. Every weather event which takes place does so within the context of that change. It is the 'butterfly effect' on steroids. Basically, I can absolutely guarantee that had the past 150 years of climate change not taken place then the recent outbreak of tornadoes in the United States would not have happened in the same way. There might have been no tornadoes... or even more tornadoes... but the weather we experienced this year would not have been exactly the same.

    Yet in another sense the only weather events which can absolutely be attributed to climate change would be those which were outside the bounds of possibility in the previous climate. There have been incidents of similar tornado outbreaks in the past so that could have happened with or without climate change. The Russian heatwave and wildfires last year were unprecedented in recorded history, but we can't rule out that similar events happened without being recorded or COULD have happened but just never hit the right conditions before. On the other hand, the breakup of ice shelves dating back to the last glaciation cycle (e.g. Larsen B) was clearly outside the realm of possibility prior to the recent global warming.

    Between those two extreme ways of looking at 'whether XYZ was caused by global warming' there is the somewhat more logical approach of observing that the question is meaningless. No weather event is "caused" by just one thing. Rather, various forces either contribute to or detract from weather events. From what I've read, most scientists (Roy Spencer disagrees, but then he also argues that creationism is more scientifically valid than evolution) think that global warming should result in a net increase to the chances of tornado formation in the United States. The fact that data shows increasing numbers of tornadoes in recent decades would tend to corroborate that.

    The counter-argument in the article Hank linked to above, that we simply 'missed' more tornadoes in the past, doesn't seem particularly plausible to me. We've had radar technology for sixty years and satellite tracking for thirty. Neither of those seems at all likely to 'miss' many tornadoes. There was a sharp jump in reported values in the 50s due to radar tracking, but not in the 80s when satellite tracking became available. Yet there has been a gradual increase in the decades since then. To me that reads like an actual increase rather than detection bias.

    In one sense ALL weather events which we are observing are due to climate change.
    On a science site, sweeping generalizations are going to be called out - of course climate change impacts weather systems, but what was happening last decade was people with an agenda highlighting specific events and using that as proof that one gas and one country were the cause.  It was silliness and detracted from efforts to implement real environmental fixes because it looked like those people had no idea what they were talking about.

    Climate change can cause higher temps, low temps, more weather, less weather, etc. because it is the word change and change has been happening for billions of years.   Anticipating specific events so far has been less accurate than a crystal ball so people should stop doing it and just focus on the big picture.   Blaming a flood, a hurricane or a tornado on climate change does a terrific disservice to science.
    We've had radar technology for sixty years and satellite tracking for thirty. Neither of those seems at all likely to 'miss' many tornadoes.

    The problem with this statement is that it's completely wrong, only the latest NWS NexRad radar systems are even capable of detecting tornado wind shears, where did I learn this? From the people I worked with at the NWS who are responsible for the systems.

    Your Guarantee is worthless.
    Never is a long time.