Michael Mann: Deniers caused Sandy

Our bad. We stopped cap-and-trade, which would have prevented Sandy.

“The cost of that 5 or 6 or 7 years of inaction that was bought with a cynical disinformation campaign potentially translates to billions if not trillions of dollars of losses in the areas of food and water resources, damage to the economy because of severe weather impacts like Hurricane Sandy, the 11 greater than 1 billion dollar weather and climate related disasters we saw in the US in 2011 and even greater damages in 2012. So there was a huge cost to society of having delayed getting control of our fossil fuel emissions. The years of inaction mean it’s going to be much more expensive to deal with the problem now.”

Read the entire interview at TransitionCulture.org.

6 thoughts on “Michael Mann: Deniers caused Sandy”

  1. Why does no one talk about the high tide that happened at the same time as the storm surge during Sandy? I suppose they forgot.

  2. No, it wasn’t us. Witches caused Sandy and all other harm. So long as witches had been under control, the weather was comfortable, harvests plentiful, people prospered and culture flourished. Today, there are too many witches and the gods are angry with us for the lack of sacrifice on our part. At least, we can hope to appease them with carbon credits.

  3. What a hack! Even the Cap’n Trade zealots have acknowledged that the effort would have almost no effect in the short run, and minimal effect in the long run. Mike Mann has always been a liar and a political tool. What a disgrace to call him a “scientist”. What do you call Al Gore with a science degree? – Mike Mann.

  4. First, we do not yet have any significant evidence that cap and trade would result in substantial lessening of CO2 in the atmosphere. Secondly, there is growing evidence that the climate change we have been experiencing (but not measuring in any scientific way) is more likely due to factors other than CO2 in the atmosphere. Third, there has not been any theoretical or experimental relationship established between hurricane Sandy and CO2 in the atmosphere.

    Mann’s wild speculations should be labelled as such. His fervor in pushing his opinions in light of the dearth of supporting science undermines his stature – if any remains.

  5. Sure, because the Chinese and Indians would have totally cut their output if we had only done it first. That’s assuming that the increased heat was caused by the increase in mankind’s output of CO2 (which is a fraction of the total) and that this in turn caused Sandy and finally that the slight reductions Mann is talking about would have had any effect. How can anybody with any kind of education in science believe that?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.