Nuttercelli Declares 70 MPH Winds To Be A Major Hurricane

ScreenHunter_913 Dec. 26 15.36

Republicans in Congress got the testimony they wanted to keep playing climate Russian roulette | Dana Nuccitelli | Environment | theguardian.com

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Nuttercelli Declares 70 MPH Winds To Be A Major Hurricane

  1. Traitor In Chief says:

    who unzipped Nutter’s straight jacket?

  2. Gamecock says:

    Scientists use the Saffir-Simpson Scale. Ipso facto, Nuttercelli is no scientist.

  3. Dave N says:

    Apparently science is now defined by whether people become offended by an event, rather than actual facts.

  4. B.C. says:

    Dave, you said it. Redefining the language as they go along is the modus operandi of the Progressive Left National Socialists. When something doesn’t fit their agenda, they simply rearrange the meaning(s) of the words, in order to push FORWARD! with the narrative, no matter how badly the actual facts and/or data are destroying their argument.

    Welcome to 1984.

  5. David says:

    I am sick of these idiots and the ones who blindly follow them. Hazel was much worse and you never hear them bring her up.

  6. To print this, the Guardian gives this guy space and pays him.

  7. Karl W. Braun says:

    Yet another epic moment in the annals of Clownatology, to be sure!

  8. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    Dana Nuccitelli is my favorite idiot savant. He may be more idiot than savant, but his posts are certainly entertaining.

    • B.C. says:

      I guess the “savant” part would be how he manages to get out of bed each morning without strangling himself with his sheets.

  9. higley7 says:

    It makes no difference how much damage was done by subtropical storm Sandy. The damages only reflect people not ready for even a subtropical storm, let alone a hurricane. Energy content is also not the basis for hurricane status, it’s the wind speed.

    New Jersey gets hit every 40 to 80 years and it is their stupidity that left them totally unprepared for weather they knew had to occur eventually.

    • Gamecock says:

      As best I can tell, they are no more prepared today than they were then, so the next storm will be just as “super.”

      • ChrisV says:

        Gamecock. you are correct. I live on Long Island and can tell you that the shoreline here is heavily developed and populated. Nothing has changed. People still want to live near the water and there really is nothing that can be done to secure these areas from future storms. As long as people continue to live in these areas it will just be a matter of time before then next one eventually comes and could certainly be much worse! I have to disagree with the post that ACR posted below. Winds on Long Island were recorded to be sustained to near 70 mph for hours on end not 55 and we had wind gusts officially reported at 94 mph. Even at that speed the storm felt very impressive and did a massive amount of damage to trees, I can’t imagine what a category 3 or higher storm would feel like to be in.

        • “I can’t imagine what a category 3 or higher storm would feel like to be in.”

          Believe me you do not want to know. And afterwards the destruction is unimaginable. 3 is bad 5 is unbelievable. South Florida survivor.

  10. ACR says:

    Steven, I understand why you say Sandy had 70 m.p.h. winds at landfall. You have repeat what the NHC said to inoculate yourself against criticism. But recall, Sandy’s strongest winds reported by land-based stations were only 55 m.p.h.

  11. Don says:

    Sandy came onshore in the NYC area at the highest full moon high tide in a year or more. I also question the damage amount, just throwing figures together to bilk the taxpayers is what nasty Cuomo and stupid Christie did. Notice we never get an accounting of the money. The entire federal government is a vast sink hole, every department and agency.

    • gator69 says:

      The last time I had storm damage (hail), the insurance company paid out twice what I required due to government regulations. Anything that had the slightest dimple was thrown away and replaced, they even paid me for trees that had no damage.

  12. Wyguy says:

    If I remember correctly, not only did Sandy make landfall at high tide, but it combined with a NorEaster too.

    • ChrisV says:

      It combined with and was energized by a strong cold front coming in from the west. This along with unusually strong blocking in the North Atlantic (negitive NAO) pulled the storm back to the west. In fact it got so cold after the strom passed that Long Island had a snowstorm a little over a week later!

  13. NikFromNYC says:

    I barely noticed it just down the street from Tom’s Diner, and Bloomberg had to be guilted into symbolically cancelling the marathon that week after initially sticking up for local businesses who would have earned the city lots of tourist tax money to help relief efforts for the bridge and tunnel fools living on a floodplain of the Atlantic Ocean on the Island of Long.

    Blockhead and Conehead over at the Guardian are having a bad trip in the eye of the storm, baby:
    http://postimg.org/image/co4pvinnv/

  14. John B., M.D. says:

    Sandy ACE: 13.6675
    Katrina ACE: 20.005
    http://policlimate.com/tropical/atlantic_storms_ace_maxw.dat

    So, it would appear that Katrina was “more energetic.”

    However, the more important data are the lack of trends for global and Atlantic hurricane frequency and ACE. http://models.weatherbell.com/global_major_freq.png and http://models.weatherbell.com/global_running_ace.png and http://models.weatherbell.com/frequency_12months.png
    Choosing one particular storm to make a case for AGW is called cherry-picking.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s