Skip to content

Another Scumbag Tries To Exploit Human Tragedy

November 18, 2013

By Paul Homewood




It did not take long for this scumbag to jump on yesterday’s tornadoes in the Midwest, and link it to AGW.


NOAA’s Storm Prediction Centre has the facts, though.




Certainly, these sort of tornado outbreaks are unusual in November, but still happen every few years.

As for his assertions about “human induced warming”, perhaps the moron might like to explain why tornadoes for the last two years have been amongst the lowest on record?


And why severe tornadoes were much more frequent before 1980?


Apparently Sachs is a “Former United Nations adviser and economist”. I suppose that rather says it all!

I suggest Mr Sachs crawls back into the woodwork.

  1. John F. Hultquist permalink
    November 19, 2013 2:28 am

    JDS is one of the many reasons I am no longer a subscriber to Scientific American.

  2. November 19, 2013 2:53 am

    Thanks for keeping folks aware of the many douche bags in love with a cult otherwise known as AGW

  3. November 19, 2013 2:54 am

    Reblogged this on libslayer2013.

  4. Brian H permalink
    November 19, 2013 4:04 am

    Association with the UN discredits Sachs. Association with Sachs discredits the UN.

    Which of the above statements is even truer than the other? It’s a puzzle.

  5. Craig M permalink
    November 19, 2013 1:56 pm

    Nope nothing that unusual to see here

  6. November 19, 2013 2:23 pm

    I notice that the majority of twits and reports on this incident are reporting the damage and most, if not all, have some link to CAWC. Little is said about the human suffering, virtually no wishing of condolences, and little human compassion expressed. At least 50 homes were leveled. One person has been confirmed dead. Nearby Peoria also suffered heavy damage after the tornado.

    These are the reports from the maggots of humankind living off the putrid carcass of misfortune.

    Oddly the one in HuffPo reports “Washington Mayor Gary Manier reportedly told people to “please pray” for the town in the wake of the damage.”

  7. Andy DC permalink
    November 19, 2013 5:42 pm

    More absooute misinformation. Absolute hysteria whenever weather events happen, as they always have and always will.

  8. Stephen permalink
    November 24, 2013 8:02 pm

    Paul – we were talking earlier on how they measured tornadoes differently in the past. This change in observation practice may explain why severe tornadoes appear to be more frequent before 1980.

    Some neutral researchers say there was a tendency to assign higher F-ratings, before Fujita improved the standards in mid- to late 70s – he got lots of data from the Super-Outbreak in 1974, which you can see in the above graph of severe tornadoes.

    Anyway, on the main point, there’s a lot of weather hysteria around these days.

    • November 24, 2013 11:19 pm

      Is there a link, Stephen?

      I’ve not got the reference to hand, but I have seen something from NOAA that rubbishes any tornado data before the 1960’s. That’s why I never graph before 1970.

  9. Stephen permalink
    November 25, 2013 7:10 pm

    Paul, Jeff Masters quotes Harold Brooks at:

    According to Brooks (2013), “Tornadoes in the early part of the official National Weather Service record (1950-approximately 1975) are rated with higher ratings than the 1975 – 2000 period, which, in turn, had higher ratings than 2001 – 2007.” Also, beginning in 2007, NOAA switched from the F-scale to the EF-scale for rating tornado damage, causing additional problems with attempting to assess if tornadoes are changing over time.
    Brooks, H.E., 2013, “Severe thunderstorms and climate change,” Atmospheric Research, Volume 123, 1 April 2013, Pages 129–138,

    I may have a copy of Brooks (2013) somewhere in my files but not at hand this evening.

    btw, Brooks puts the change at 1975, but the Super-Outbreak in 1974 was measured very well, in great detail, by Fujita.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: