AccuWeather's Bastardi Argues Against Blaming Global Warming for Hurricanes

  • Bookmark and Share

On the Tuesday August 21 The O'Reilly Factor on FNC, AccuWeather senior meteorologist Joe Bastardi poured water on claims that a global warming trend has been the cause of hurricanes of increased intensity as he contended that the Northern Hemisphere similarly saw periods of increased hurricane activity in past decades, going back to the 1890s. Bastardi: "We're back in the '30's, '40's and 50's. This back and forth cycle that occurs, we saw it in the 1890s to 1910. ... And people are just getting carried away and fascinated when, if they go back and look at what happened before, you can see the similarities." (Transcript follows)

After getting his guest to give a summary of the latest on Hurricane Dean, FNC host Bill O'Reilly turned the discussion to global warming. O'Reilly: "Of course, environmentalists are going to say this is global warming. And is the fact that the waters are warmer, is that going to make it a tougher fall for hurricanes for the USA?"

In his response, Bastardi brought up harsh hurricane seasons from earlier in the century. Bastardi: "We've seen this before. And I coined this term 'time of climatic hardship' because we are back in the 30's, 40's and 50's as far as the overall climate pattern in the Northern Hemisphere. You see, we've seen this before. The problem is a lot of people don't go back and look at those type of things."

He soon brought up the hurricane that hit New York City in 1938 as he predicted history will likely repeat itself somewhat soon: "You, as a Long Island boy, must have heard tales from your father about the '38 hurricane on Long Island. And that's what we're looking at, and the potential for that type of thing down the road. But if it happens, if it happens again, and I do think it is going to happen within our lifetime, and probably sooner rather than later, some kind of big storm like that, people will go out of their minds. Yet it was there before."

Bastardi concluded with his contention that similar cycles occurred in the later 19th to early 20th century, and that in modern times scientists are more able to measure the changes. Bastardi: "We're back in the '30's, '40's and 50's. This back and forth cycle that occurs, we saw it in the 1890s to 1910. But we couldn't measure it then. So we're measuring it now with all these great instruments. And people are just getting carried away and fascinated when, if they go back and look at what happened before, you can see the similarities."

Below is a transcript of a relevant portions from the Tuesday August 21 The O'Reilly Factor:

BILL O'REILLY: Now, I understand the water temperatures surrounding the East Coast of the USA are four to five degrees warmer than usual.

JOE BASTARDI, AccuWeather: Right.

O'REILLY: And, of course, environmentalists are going to say this is global warming. And is the fact that the waters are warmer, is that going to make it a tougher fall for hurricanes for the USA?

BASTARDI: Well, it always means that there's more potential because, for stronger storms. But we've seen this before. And I coined this term "time of climatic hardship" because we are back in the 30's, 40's and 50's as far as the overall climate pattern in the Northern Hemisphere. You see, we've seen this before. The problem is a lot of people don't go back and look at those type of things.

O'REILLY: So you don't see it as anything out of the ordinary as far as nature in its cycle is concerned?

BASTARDI: No, no.

O'REILLY: There's no more heightened danger in 2007 than there was in 1937?

BASTARDI: Well, it's funny you bring that year up. You, as a Long Island boy, must have heard tales from your father about the '38 hurricane on Long Island.

O'REILLY: Yeah.

BASTARDI: And that's what we're looking at, and the potential for that type of thing down the road. But if it happens, if it happens again, and I do think it is going to happen within our lifetime, and probably sooner rather than later, some kind of big storm like that, people will go out of their minds. Yet it was there before.

Now, let me show you this graphic I had. In the '60s through the '80s, we were what we call in the cold cycle of the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation warm cycle, the Pacific oscillation, which meant the Pacific waters were warmer than normal in the equatorial areas. You were cooler than normal up north, cooler than normal in the North Atlantic, more typhoons, more Pacific hurricanes, less Atlantic action. By the way, you know, it doesn't take a genius to say, well, if we got cool water up here and cool water up here, the continents in between are going to be cooler because, after all, they're surrounded by cooler water.

Now where are we now? Well, we're back in the '30's, '40's and 50's. This back and forth cycle that occurs, we saw it in the 1890s to 1910. But we couldn't measure it then. So we're measuring it now with all these great instruments. And people are just getting carried away and fascinated when, if they go back and look at what happened before, you can see the similarities.

—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thanks to AGW, I can't even

Thanks to AGW, I can't even turn on the weather without thinking of politics. The whole "Global Warming causes hurricanes" schtick is an unecessary scare tactic to cause panic.

It's intellectual extortion ...

... globalwarmingtologists like Heidi Cullen will do everything in their power to forward global warming doctrine and turn regional, seasonal, and localized temperature anomalies into "global" warming.

Bastardi has always been

Bastardi has always been right.

People should listen and absorb on the left....

Of course that is futile...

Doesn't fit the AGW agenda....$$$.... power and all that jazz. 

I know it is wrong and

I know it is wrong and immature, especially for a 29 year old... But, I giggle a little bit at that man's unfortunate last name.

<insert something clever>

LMAO... I think that is

LMAO...

I think that is kinda' normal OIF right off the bat to think of the name....

Just too bad it wasn't belonging to a complete nit-wit leftist eh?

Names

Speaking of names. Dean was a great name for something which began as a "hurricane"and quickly petered into nothingness.

NEVER, NEVER trust a "liberal"

AGW haedline

Headline spotted on yahoo.com: "France's cold, rainy summer fails to deter tourists" 

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

And it's been snowing in Colorado ...

... according to the Global Warming Channel (a.k.a. The Weather Channel).

You know what "global" warming is? It's a handful of jacka__es who put their thermometers in direct sunlight for 5 hours and then start screaming "IT'S GLOBAL WARMING!!".

Have you ever taken a look at where NOAA and other weather stations have been putting their d_mn thermometers over the past 10 years?

WOW! Imagine the genius!

When dealing with a cyclical system, go back and check the cycle in the past to see where we are in it before crying "wolf". Amazing!

It's a good thing that Al Gore isn't a woman! He'd thnk he was bleeding to death each and every month.

 

The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic

50 years ago

We would not have even heard about Dean let alone that it briefly went to CAT 5. Without satellites as sophisticated as the ones launched since 1980, we would not know hour by hour the wind speeds. We had a couple of "hurricane hunter aircraft" but they would not likely fly that far south and they usually made trips every 8 hours.

Dean was at CAT 5 for just a few hours. We would have received reports of a storm near Jamaica and certainly that a hurricane hit Mexico, but because of the sparse population, it would never have been a news story. It would be unlikely that we would even have any verifiable wind measurements. There may have been many Dean like storms.

 

Dean

Actually, ten years ago, Hurricane Dean would have rated barely a mention in the news. That's because it was no threat to the United States and aside from Andrew there had not been a serious hurricane in years. 

Now with all this anothropomorphic global warming nonsense, Dean is big news.

-

Great point.  A prior gap in the record doesn't mean everything that happens now is a record-breaker.

Bastardi will return

I fully expect to see Bastardi on t.v in the near future with a puncture wound on the side of his neck, a glazed expression, and a monotoned recant of his positions.

Just got back from the

Just got back from the Caribbean. Had to fly through Dean's outter bands. But other than that, the weather was fine. Guess all that nice weather was caused by Global Warming.

If Dean was caused by global warming; all that nice weather had to be caused by it too. 

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

Do we still get to use

Do we still get to use photos for out identifier? I found an interesting sign to use. Here.  (We're not the folks in the photo. It's just one of the photos available on the web.)

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

danbo

your avatar appears at your profile only, it would appear you will have to re-size your pic or crop it to the sign

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.  

coverage of 1998 vs 1934

ABC article about the recent James Hansen oopsie.

Placed as the last sentence and, therefore, giving it the smallest likelihood that it will be read, is Univ of Alabama Roy Spencer's important assertion that "In the last year or so, more and more scientists have been coming out of the closet and admitting they've had some doubts about this whole global warming thing."

On the other hand, given the track record to date of the msm on AGW, I am truly grateful it is in the article at all.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Technology/CSM/story?id=3523859&page=1

dahlia -- Hansen really

dahlia -- Hansen really needs to remove that infamous Hockey Stick from his ass.

It seems to be clouding his thinking.

Check out my latest YouTube...but only if you support the troops and their mission: Better Men Than Me/The Battle For Fallujah

What I find perplexing is

What I find perplexing is why they are discussing how dangerous 2007 is, when we have had 1 hurricane to date, that didn't make landfall in the USA, and that also follows 2006, a year that was pretty inactive and that had no hurricanes make landfall in the USA.

"O'REILLY: And, of course, environmentalists are going to say this is global warming."

Well, Bill, if it is global warming that has reduced the number of hurricanes over the past 2 years, let's pray for more of it.

 

Unfortunately facts don't

Unfortunately facts don't matter to the global warming crowd. They have way too much invested in their cause to back down now. They have millions of dollars riding in on that wave!

Facts don't matter?

The authors of all the comments I've read posted on this article are ignoring the facts.  What a childish bunch of neo-cons.  Oh, I know! let's poke fun and insult the people we don't agree with!