According to climate science one cannot link a single weather event to climate change, since climate and climate change are the sum total or average of all weather events.
However, I think Cuomo (or Bloomberg) made the comment we have had two 100-year events in 2 years in the northern east coast area, ergo it’s probably due to climate change. That’s a bit more along the lines of how a scientist may view it. Along with a hurricane slamming into Brazil several years ago – an unheard of event. Along with record numbers of regional droughts, wildfires, floods, and other knock-on effects of CC.
In addition they would point out that a necessary (but not sufficient) cause for a hurricane is warm water, and it is known CC is contributing to that. The fact that searise is happening around the world and in some places, like the US east coast, is even higher than average, would make the surge worse. As would the increased precip that comes with CC. As would the a negative arctic oscillation weather pattern, which brought the storm westward instead of eastward, which some climate scientists are saying are being increased by climate change. (These neg AOs also bring more freq killing freezes to my area and N. Mexico, causing $billions in winter crop losses.) The fact that it happened during high tide was just very bad luck.
However, we also have to realize that science is by nature reticent in its claims. Scientists strive to avoid the FALSE POSITIVE of making untrue claims so as to protect their reputations, or people might not believe them. They start from the “null hypothesis” of saying CC is not happening, and it is not increasing hurricane intensity, geographic distribution or out-of-season timing, and only when they get plenty of evidence to the contrary (which they have gotten in the past 17 years, and it’s building up and becoming evermore robust) do they say CC is happening and is having this or that impact.
As laypersons and policy-makers concerned about life, limb and property, Cuomo and we would be more interested in avoiding the FALSE NEGATIVE of failing to address a true serious problem. We would want to follow the “research hypothesis” of assuming CC is upon us and we need to mitigate it (by reducing our greenhouse gas emissions), and bec that would save us lots of money (I speak from personal experience & research), we could then use those savings for adaptation measures, such as building better subways & seawalls, etc.
We also have to realize that Voris and Ventura are NOT climate scientists. Neither am I, but if you look into the science carefully I think you will find what I’m saying is fairly correct.
Upshot, I don’t consider it wrong that Cuomo attributed Sandy’s intensity, pattern, and destruction to CC. Rightly or wrongly I’ve been attributing all the big hurricanes since Hurricane Andrew back in 1992 in Florida to CC partly to my failure to mitigate CC as I should, tho it wasn’t until 2005 that scientists were able to say that CC had been increasing hurricane/cyclone intensity worldwide for the past 30 years.
I even sent a personal note to a Seccular Carmelite friend in Alabama, whose roof was blown away and suffered heave property losses during Hurricane Rita in 2005, and told him I had started mitigating CC some 15 years earlier so as to help reduce harms to people like him, and praying that others would also do so. It did give him some tiny solace.
If there is anyone here at CAF who has suffered from Sandy, other hurricanes/storms, recent wildfires, droughts, floods, tropical disease spread, higher food prices, or the many other knock-on effects from climate change, I would like to you know that I have had you in my heart for over 22 years, in my prayers and in my efforts to mitigate climate change and it’s knock on effects. I am very sorry that it was not enough. I will continue to hold you in my heart and in my prayers.