Hurricane Sandy didn’t just hit NYC

Crikey readers weigh in on the biggest issues of the day.

Hurricane Sandy

Dave Lennon writes: Re. “Time for a Sandy Smoothie as Frankenstorm hits” (Tuesday). Now you have really really pissed me off. The Crikey lead on Tuesday was a storm in America, that at the time of writing this has killed 14 Americans but in its formative stages was more powerful and  killed 60+ people in the Caribbean, ripped whole countries to pieces, causing huge economic damage.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

4 thoughts on “Hurricane Sandy didn’t just hit NYC

  1. zut alors

    Further to Dave Lennon’s letter, the ABC has now arrived at a point where they show a picture gallery of Sandy damage on the news website but neglect to give any details of location.

    The hapless information-seeker is supplied with numerous images which could have been taken almost anywhere on the planet. The only additional information comes in the form of a caption revealed only when the cursor is positioned in the right spot. These captions are breathtaking in their brevity eg: ‘flooded tunnel’, ‘beached boats’ etc. No location, nothing.

    All part of the dumbing down process – now well-implemented and taking effect.

  2. Phillip Musumeci

    RE Hurricane Sandy: In Did Climate Change Cause Hurricane Sandy? (30Oct2012), Mark Fischetti, an editor at Scientific American, describes how on average the cold jet stream air flow from the arctic which increased the intensity of this storm is now more likely following higher levels of arctic sea ice melt from warming. It references a June 2012 Scientific American article with links to some Cornell work discussing “Arctic Wild Card in the Weather”.

  3. Tamas Calderwood

    It’s pretty funny that Matt Andrews (comments, yesterday) appeals to the high authority of skepticalscience . com in order to counter my point about the lack of warming for the past 16 years because the article Matt references actually admits that there has been no statistically significant warming for 15 years. It quotes the UK Met Office saying “the current period of reduced warming is not unprecedented and 15 year long periods are not unusual”.

    Well, yes – but our record CO2 emissions are unusual. So if the current pause in warming looks like the previous pauses when our CO2 emissions were much lower, doesn’t this suggest the 0.8C of warming in the past 150 years is natural?

  4. Joel

    Tamas – the world is warmer than it was 15 years ago. There is no pause. What there is the fact that if you look at sufficiently little data then it’s more likely that any signal will be drowned out in noise. The people telling you that there’s no statistically significant warming in the last fifteen years always neglect to mention the fact that there was significantly significant warming in the last sixteen years – the extra year isn’t something magic, it’s just data outside your blinkers.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details