Gore Links Cyclone to Global Warming

By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in Environment, Gore

Yesterday, Al Gore told NPR that the Myanmar cyclone was a consequence of global warming. Gore has previously alluded to Hurricane Katrina being a result of global warming as well. The problem is, there is no good scientific proof that global warming is influencing the destructiveness of these storms. Gore is making a conjecture and turning a tragedy into a political tool.

I’m no global warming denialist. I believe human action is causing the Earth to warm and our climates to change. I am an avid conservationist. But I am also appropriately skeptical of the global warming doomsayers such as Gore. I don’t take on faith that every change in temperature, every climate shift and every catastrophic weather event is repayment for our sins of carbon emission. Our climate and weather are far too complicated and naturally volatile for me to think there isn’t more affecting these systems than simple human action.

That’s why I cringe when I hear Gore and others connect horrible tragedies to global warming. Sure, these events make the problem seem very real and very immediate, but it’s scientifically dishonest not to admit that there is no hard proof that recent big storms are the result of our carbon emissions. You can’t one moment stand behind the banner of science and then the other moment conveniently leave out facts because those facts are inconvenient to your political objectives.

If we are going to rally the world to combat the human-caused elements of global warming, we have to stick to the scientific facts and resist the urge to inappropriately use weather-related tragedies to frighten people into action.


This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 7th, 2008 and is filed under Environment, Gore. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

11 Responses to “Gore Links Cyclone to Global Warming”

  1. Avinash_Tyagi Says:

    While I agree in principle, correlation is usually the best scientist can do in these topics

  2. bubbles Says:

    Yeah until Al Gore gets a PhD in Environmental Science I’m going to take his advice on global warming about as seriously as I take Amy Winehouse’s word on teetotalism.

  3. Rob Says:

    Alan… you will be excommunicated for your act of heresy, you have only yourself to blame.

  4. Jimmy the Dhimmi Says:

    One problem with Al Gore’s theory about the Myanmar Cyclone, is that the oceans have actually been cooling over at least the past 5 years.

    Then again, its possible that global warming actually inhibits hurricane formation, which might explain why it takes a cooler ocean to produce such a storm.

    Shows how much Al Gore knows!

  5. Dos Says:

    “correlation is usually the best scientist can do in these topics” – avinash

    Does this apply to the global warming via man-made carbon emmissions. Or has actual causation been proven there? I’m just trying to figure out fits in “these topics” and what does not.

  6. Jim S Says:

    Actually Gore is just repeating what several studies have hinted might be true. There is also a study that has models that suggest that there might be an effect that would increase wind shear in a way that would counter the effects of warming that would tend to increase storm strength. Given that it is known that warm ocean water is the fuel for hurricanes/cyclones to look at how warming would affect those storms is only logical. What the data seems to indicate is that in those areas where ocean water has warmed to a great enough depth that the storm can’t cause enough circulation to bring up cooler water and thereby limit the “fuel” the storm has available. It’s a balancing act, according to what I’ve read. But the more the ocean warms the deeper that warming can go and the more that balance would go towards stronger storms, but not necessarily more storms.

  7. Dos Says:

    “have hinted might be true” — is significantly different than asserting it as a fact to push one’s political agenda. Gore should in the future: 1) cite his source and 2) speak in less authoritative and certain language. He actually does his own cause damage by not doing so. But I sense, AlGore enjoys being a demogague and Hollywood celebrity which doesn’t lend itself to careful, objective, scientific advocacy — too many people to impress with bluster.

  8. Rob in Denver Says:

    “‘have hinted might be true’ — is significantly different than asserting it as a fact to push one’s political agenda.”

    QFT

    The title of former VPOTUS provides an enormous platform from which to speak. He opens his mouth, and people listen and then accept it as truth. It’s a dangerous game that fear mongering to influence public policy.

  9. kranky kritter Says:

    Basically, if you’re in the drain circlers club, EVERY natural disaster is further proof that you’re right and drastic action must be taken.

    Reminds me of religion. At this point, I’m pretty much numb to this effect. The best you can do is ignore it.

  10. Dos Says:

    The problem kranky is not that AlGore is wrong, the problem is that he may be correct. He does the same for environmentalism, that Hagee/Wright/Farewell, et al. do to religion. By grossly inflating his scientific certainty and using a tradegy for political gain — he gives ammo to those with opposite political agendas. He should be totally marginalized, not be granted the figure-head, of the environmental movement. He’s really is a fucking embarrassment.

  11. Markus Says:

    Sorry, but you are wrong on many levels.
    http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/5/9/154426/7163

    quote: “Gore Said Myanmar Cyclone Is Not A Consequence Of Global Warming. The BMI headline ignores that Gore says in the interview that “any individual storm can’t be linked singularly to global warming — we’ve always had hurricanes.”"

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: