Providence, R.I. — the waters in the capital of Rhode Island are more than 13 feet deep. Several motorists literally drown in their cars. All 40 homes on Napatree Point between the Atlantic Ocean and Little Narragansett Bay were cleared from the land. Not a speck of habitation is left, except for the solid concrete stairs to what once was a beach club. In Massachusetts, the highest recorded wind speed in the history of the United States from a hurricane was measured at 186 mph. Over 600 people lost their lives and over 30,000 homes are either destroyed or severely damaged. Winds were so strong and sustained, the Empire State Building swayed. It has been estimated that 2 billion trees were knocked down in the forests of New York and New England.
Hurricanes didn’t have names in 1938, but because this storm is considered the worst and fastest moving storm in the history of Providence, R.I., it was sometimes called the Long Island Express (at some points during its travels from off the coast of Africa on Sept. 9, 1938, when it was first observed by a ship until it dissipated about two weeks later, forward speeds were clocked at 70 mph). In Westhampton, Long Island, it swept an entire movie theater, projectionist and all 20 patrons two miles out to sea where they drowned.
From the dates, obviously this was not Hurricane Sandy, which pales by comparison with respect to severity, yet how many people in the news tried to intimate that Sandy was from global warming, climate change, or whatever the name d’jour may be, to create crisis and hysteria? The last great hurricane to hit New England before the Long Island Express was in 1869. It was known as the Saxby Gale (the word hurricane was not developed back then). It is not surprising that the Saxby Gale occurred 69 years before the Long Island Express and was almost entirely forgotten by 1938 as the Long Island Express was not even noted in the news reports some 74 years later when Sandy hit the East Coast.
Recently the “Warmists” have been pounding the drum with constant stories about weather, like the warm winter where Chicago didn’t have any snow into January. Must be global warming. Of course those same global warming advocates run for cover when two or three late winter blizzards hit most of the entire eastern half of the United States. Other advocates say all this “extreme” weather is caused by global warming. Oh, excuse me, the new term is “climate change.”
We almost never hear in the media about the extremely cold and long European winters of recent. London, whose high temperatures in April are not much above freezing, is having double problems. Because of the green agenda energy prices have skyrocketed to the point where much of the populace has to decide whether to “heat or eat.”
Estimates of deaths from the cold in England for this year may be upwards of 30,000 people as compared to the heat wave of 2003 when an estimated 2,000 people died as a result. But it’s not just England. Much of Europe has for the past several years been cloaked in extreme cold during winter. In 2009 there were record snowstorms and in January and February of 2012 there were blizzards and an extreme cold snap. Could it be the global warming advocates have it backwards?
Two Russian biogeochemists, Vladimir Bashkin and Rauf Galiulin, certainly think so and their published findings that the climate is cooling are gaining ground among independent scientists. The underlying basis for this cooling is a weaker sun; weaker in the sense of less sunspot activity and a reduced solar wind. The science of sunspots has been the topic of the Balancing Act in the past when discussing the work of Danish scientist Henrik Swensmark wherein Swensmark developed a relationship between clouds and sunspots. With fewer sunspots there are more clouds and hence cooler temperatures. During the 20th century there were more sunspots, less clouds and hence warmer temperatures because the solar wind retards cloud development.
During the Little Ice Age, the Maunder minimum of almost no sunspot activity occurred from about 1645 and 1715 during which the Earth reached its coldest point of that approximately 400-year period known as the LIA.
But there is more to this story. A recent paper by New Zealand scientist, Vincent Gray, questions the whole Greenhouse theory with respect to CO2. The CO2 aspect of the current theory was proposed by a Swedish physicist, Svante Arrhenius. He published extensively near the turn of the last century on the effect of CO2 on the atmosphere. Gray however found that Arrhenius based his calculations on the measurements of Samuel P. Langley, the scientist who was supposed to invent powered flight. But it turns out Arrhenius got it backwards and used water vapor instead of CO2 in making his claims. Big mistake.
The theory was revived by Guy Callendar, an English steam engineer and inventor. His flaw was that he believed that the only form of energy transfer in the atmospheric system was radiation. He ignored or didn’t know about convection, conduction and evaporation. The bottom line is that the IPCC was set up to prove this flawed theory. Most of the global warming models can’t even reproduce the past climates, never mind the future. Perhaps that is why there has been no significant warming during the past 18 years while CO2 has continued to climb about 10 percent during the same period.
But why are the warmists pounding the drum harder than ever? For warmists any weather event is related to global warming. Every disaster is caused by global warming. It is unrelenting in the news, the latest example being the late spring blizzards that hammered the eastern half of the United States. What could be their reason? Money. The global warming industry receives at least $20 billion a year from the government. Grants and research money the past decade have been estimated at over $150 billion. We are talking a cash cow here that would not exist without the fear and hysteria created by the warmists. The “war” on global warming isn’t that far behind the war in Iraq. But most amazing is how we could allow the spending of so much taxpayer money fighting a fictitious battle that has ramifications of costing the taxpayer so much more in dollars and freedom.
News Bulletin: Bosch said it is getting out of the solar photovoltaic business it started in 2008 as it has taken a $2.4 billion euro haircut. Three thousand employees are in jeopardy of losing their jobs if the business or parts of it cannot be sold. Bosch is just another casualty of the green energy debacle, which is so aptly named, because green energy costs a lot of green. Bosch is a German manufacturer of electronic components for automobiles and industry. If you have sticker shock from the price of a German car, you can blame global warming.
Larry Weitzman is a resident of the Rescue area.