OCT 23, 2001
Do most scientists who believe in the greenhouse effect say that we should expect to see more environmental catastrophes in the next 25 to 50 years?
I don’t think of this as a futuristic problem but as a current one. It’s a problem that gets worse by increments. If you talk to Tom Karl, the head of the National Climatic [Data] Center, he’s more comfortable saying that there’s no weather event that’s not affected by the greenhouse effect now. If you look at terrible weather events in recent years, like Hurricane Mitch, you have to ask: At what point does extra rain cross a critical threshold and become a 100-year flood? At what point does a 100-year flood become a 500-year flood? Also, there can be surprises and all of the surprises were bad ones. For example, you’ll see a Level 5 hurricane instead of a Level 4.
Next he will be saying crazy stuff like rainfall is associated with clouds.
There hasn’t been a major hurricane strike in the US for seven years.
Yes, tropical storms and hurricanes over land are huge rain producers, as they were 100 years ago or 500 years ago. The drought the last couple years has been in part a result of few hurricane strikes.
Tom Karl is another political scientist who knows where his bread is buttered. Does anyone honestly believe that he would give his political bosses answers that would jeopardize their money-making CO2 scam or pull the plug on a major source of NCDC’s research funding?
The impact of man-caused CO2 on global climate is so minute (if, indeed, there is any measurable effect at all) that it is the equivalent of a fart in a hurricane. Karl and his fellow greedy doomsayers are in it for the bucks, the perks, and the publicity. They should all be fired for scientific malfeasance.
I agree and thank you for the synopsis .
This claim was made 11 years ago. None of those things he said have come to pass.
@Kirkmeyers CO2 fluctuations happen AFTER a climatic event, not before. So it’s sufficient to say that it is a product of temperature change, not a cause.