You said this:<quoted text>
What? Anybody listening to the science?
Climate science explains how global warming can make a superstorms like Sandy more destructive in several ways:
Warming-driven sea level rise makes storm surges more destructive. In fact, a recent study found “The sea level on a stretch of the US Atlantic coast that features the cities of New York, Norfolk and Boston is rising up to four times faster than the global average.”
“Owing to higher SSTs [sea surface temperatures] from human activities, the increased water vapor in the atmosphere leads to 5 to 10% more rainfall and increases the risk of flooding,” as Kevin Trenberth explained to me in a 2011 email about Hurricane Irene. He elaborates on that point for Sandy here and for all superstorms in this article.
“However, because water vapor and higher ocean temperatures help fuel the storm, it is likely to be more intense and bigger as well,” Trenberth added (see another of his articles here). Relatedly, warming also extends the range of warm SSTs, which can help sustain the strength of a hurricane as it steers on a northerly track into cooler water (much as apparently happened for Irene). September had the second highest global ocean temperatures on record and the Eastern seaboard was 5°F warmer than average (with global warming responsible for about 1°F of that).
The unusual path of the storm — into the heavily populated east coast rather than out to see — was caused by a very strong blocking high pressure system that recent studies have linked to warming. Meteorologist and former Hurricane Hunter Jeff Masters has an excellent analysis of this,“Why did Hurricane Sandy take such an unusual track into New Jersey?“
I have put these in order from most scientific certainty to least. The first two — the impact of sea level rise and increased water vapor — are unequivocal. The third is extremely likely. The fourth is more speculative.
"You're still unable to grasp that the analysis of a single event might be different from the analysis of several years of events, demonstrating a laughable incompetence that shows how well you deserve to be called Krusty the clown."
So the analysis of Sandy is a single event, but the analysis of several years events could be different. You can't have it both ways. You lecture me that a drought event or a cold event not related to AGW really means nothing as it is a single event, but then you go into great detail about Sandy. Why? It's a single event.