Enviros try using Sandy as an excuse to block re-development in Jersey

Never let a crisis go to waste.

The Associated Press reports,

Some environmentalists say New Jersey should consider not rebuilding everything lost to Superstorm Sandy.

U.S. Geological Survey scientist Jeffress Willliams says that rising sea levels and changing weather patterns make it likely that the coast will be hit by more frequent destructive storms…

But according to the Star-Ledger,

… “The Great September Gale” of 1821, one of more than 50 extreme tropical storms or hurricanes either to graze or hit the Garden State in the past 270 years, according to the American Meteorological Society. But like Sandy, the 1821 hurricane was a rare event, widely considered by weather historians to be the last intense hurricane to make landfall in the Garden State in 350 years, and only the second in 700 years, according to the geological record…

So how does one storm since 1821 constitute evidence of “changing weather patterns make it likely that the coast will be hit by more frequent destructive storms”?

10 thoughts on “Enviros try using Sandy as an excuse to block re-development in Jersey”

  1. Lived in Harris Co., TX over 30 years and experienced 4 hurricanes, one tropical storm and numerous heavy rainfalls. Tropical storm Allison was the most damaging storm our neighborhood experienced during that period. Many houses with more than a foot of water. It all boils down to conditions at any given place and time. We didn’t talk about global warming being the cause. Weather is what it is and there is nothing we can do about it. It is interesting to see what the liberals in the Northeast do after the storm. Are they going to roll up their sleeves and get about the business of life or are they going to sit and wait for the government to come take care of them? Indications so far seem to be the latter.

  2. Storms are not devastating at all. They are only so when they push their way through inhabited areas. Were the path of Tropical hurricane Sandy not New Jersey or New York, but an isolated area, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation.
    We can only guess what kind of devastation it had out at sea but our only gauge is the fact that some mariners were killed when caught in its fury. Sad, tragic and a terrible time for their loved ones, but had they not been there, would we care that huge waves had been whipped up? Would we even know?
    Whilst no one wishes for the devastation that any cyclone, hurricane or tropical storm causes, we need to keep everything in perspective.
    At the end of the day, it was just a lot of wind and heavy rain.

  3. Storms of the Sandy type are rare but certainly devastating. One could ask if high-value properties should locate where they will predictably be damaged or destroyed by “rare but certainly devastating” storms that are sure to happen. And the answer could be yes — in which case the owners of the properties, not society at large, are responsible for mitigating the physical and financial risks. That would be a combination of design, construction and insurance.

  4. Sandy is giving people a pretty good idea what their lives would be like without Fuel, electricity, transportation, heat etc. ….Hopefully A heck of a wakeup call for millions of people next time they hear someone preaching this green religion. Sandy is the Perfect EARTH Hour.

  5. The only solution to reducing world energy usage is to cut the number of people in half. Perhaps we should eliminated all adults without a college degree first. I am sure that the liberal establishment will ….

  6. I am detecting a changing pattern – in the catastrophic global warming argument. Now it is that every storm is more desctructive than it would have been without all this (anthropenically induced) global warming – even if there are fewer storms. I know, it’s not faslifiable and not science, but what else should be expected. It’s all they have right now.

    Maybe they should concentrate on the invevitability that tropical storms, hurricanes, and combined storms will sooner or later hit and sooner or later hit at the same time as high tide. Stopping climate from changing is the least viable of all the non-solutions for a real problem.

  7. Personally I could care less if people want to rebuild. I just don’t them using public Money to protect their houses from the environment. For example: millions wasted on replenishing lost sand on beaches and the government insuring them. If people want to build in weather sensitive areas then they should be on their own.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.