It is all Global Warming's Fault
By Erick Posted in Policy — Comments (40) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Northern Michigan is having one of the top ten coldest beginnings of February in 100 years.
Cambodia is seeing record lows, with the daily highs not getting out of the 40's on some days.
Pakistan and India are both seeing very cold temperatures.
Meanwhile, polar bears are using ice drifts to get out of Greenland because it has gotten too cold for them. And Iceland really is.
This is all global warming's fault.
BTW, David All has some thoughts on the PR war being won by the Algore crowd.
« Upset About The World Food Crisis? — Comments (3) | Another Perspective On Teenaged Girls and Monopolies — Comments (30) »
It is all Global Warming's Fault 40 Comments (0 topical, 40 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Committing suicide by throwing themselves in front of motor vehicles.
Must be AGW
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
If everything that happens is due to AGW, even when it is not warming as predicted, it unprovable. The AGW promoters simply restate the problem and explain away the dsicrepancy. This is exactly the opposite of what science does. Which means it is not science.
there is not a damn thing we can do to stop this from being used to steal our rights and property, Let there be no mistake. It will cost us dearly because people are easily frightened by what they don't understand.
On the bright side, as our nation slips more and more toward a Mexican style republic, we will increasingly be able to use bribes to circumvent all of the silly anti global warming laws, so there is that to look forward to.
PS. Better study your Spanish
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
We have a great ability to simply ignore our government.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
here...they can't find water to land. They are all huddled on the frozen lakes...many fear they will all begin to die soon.
Me?...I don't care, as they are probably French Cnadian geese.
"And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."
Abe Lincoln
nuff said - the death rays of global warming penetrated Anna Nicole Smith and killed her...Gore we need you!
..with record cooling going on around the globe. But I am going to venture a guess here that you're either going to see responses, or find one elsewhere, the purport to show that life's many chill spells and ice floes can be caused by....
...Global Warming.
In fact I know they'll say that. The response for snowfall is generally that increased water vapor due to rising heat will cause MORE snow in some areas. The cold snaps are caused by GW's effect of PUSHING cold air northward from Antarctic and southware from the Arctic. It takes much energy to force this chilly air up and down and into the jet stream, etc, etc.
tags--such as communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative,and so forth--are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. --R. Heinlein
Whether it's too warm or too cold you blame it on global warming. You don't really need to think too much, since the answer is established regardless of the circumstances.
When I see these kind of posts, I'm never sure whether the authors are climate change denialists who know they are talking crap, but do it anyway to sow confusion, or whether people really believe that these are serious points about climate change.
Being in a charitable mood, I'll assume the latter and explain why they are so silly.
The difference is between two related, but funadamentally different concepts: weather and climate.
Weather is what happens over a short space of time, and will fluctuate greatly in any short-term period. Climate is the average of weather over a long period.
By definition, you cannot make any sort of sensible judgment about climate on the basis of the weather in a particular day or week. You need to look at trends over much longer periods: years and decades. And when you look over those periods, the warming trend is obvious and undeniable.
And to short-circuit the inevitable gotcha, yes, that means that those who point to a single event like Hurricane Katrina, or even the entire 2005 hurricane season as evidence of climate change are on shaky ground. It IS true to say that intensified hurricane activity in the Carribean is one of the things that climate models consistently predict, but a single season is not nearly enough evidence to prove that it's happening already: although it is a significant data point.
This, by the way, is why it's always safe to assume that anyone who trots out the "we can't predict tomorrow's weather, so how can we predict climate change" line is either an idiot or a charlatan.
It's like the difference between predicting a baseball player's performance over a season and what they will do in a single at-bat. We can say with a fair degree of confidence that, barring injury, Albert Pujols will hit somewhere around .330 with 40-50 homers and 80-100 walks. but when he actually steps up to the plate, we can't confidently predict exactly what he is going to do in that at-bat: all we can say is that there's about a 1 in 3 chance he'll get a hit, a 1 in 6 chace he'll take a walk and a 1 in 11 or 12 chance he'll hit a homer.
Where you start to talk about "climate change deniers" (or, bizarrely "denalists" here). Lets leave the not-so-subtle Holocaust allusions out of it, OK?
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Zuiko, Zuiko, if you would like to supply me with another word that describes a person who refuses to acknowledge a set of facts that no reasonable, informed person could deny and which avoids the implication you see, I would be happy to use it.
EVEN IF the anthro GW picture is as horrid as mentioned or threatened, its arrival will be fed on by political jackals more to our detriment than help.
But on the other side, comparing the Doubting Thomas.com type sites and posters here is tantamount to just name-calling, and proves nothing. Worse, it is comparing a mere hesitence (to get government busybodies and dubious UN regulations in gear) with pouring people's ashes into deep pits after cremating them----or just denying that such ever took place.
GW may give us heat, but a Ravensbruck oven it ain't, chief.
Even if it comes to us.
--SWT
Wakefield, I was certainly not trying to create that association by using the term "denialists" - that is simply the term I know that best describes the type of person I'm trying to identify.
As I replied to Zuiko, if anyone can suggest an alternative that says the same thing, I'd be happy to use it here and elsewhere.
As for holocaust equivalence, while I am in no way drawing a link, I do think that whan we think about climate change in moral terms, one of the factors we ought to consider the consequences in the likely range of human deaths. Without action, I have no doubt that it will be in the millions: likely the tens of millions.
I find that adds some impetus to my thinking and color to my assessment of leaders who refuse to act.
And if you want to keep posting here, learn to express yourself in a way that demonstrates less overt contempt towards people that you disagree with.
Moe
PS: indeed, life isn't fair, yes, I have the ability to make this stick, and no, arguing the point is contraindicated.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
Moe - I'm sorry if I've caused offence. I can see how my tone in that first post was a little much and I apologise. It's not a defense, but a partial explanation to point out that on a couple of these threads I've been the object of a small group of posters who prefer to mock and belittle rather than engage in honest discourse, and I admit I let it get under my skin.
Maybe there's some other piece of Nazi-related imagery you can conjure up for this purpose, but I'll have no part in it.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Its called a SCIENTIST... of which I am one. I have a MS, I have studied paleoclimates, am expert in computer modeling, data collection and data analysis. The sscience of global warming is unproven. There are strong opinions, and reasonable arguments on both sides of the issue. The asertion that reasonable people cannot deny the so-called fact of global warming is patently false. There is plenty of dissent and dissagreement.
THis is what you AGW people have a problem with... dissent in science is good, necessary and expected. I find it repulsive that non-scientists trample our sacred priciples and bastardize our work!
There are no facts about the climate 100 years from now. There are only theories based on a partial set of facts gathered today. That's where your hubris shows. You have a certain belief of what will happen with no proof that it actually has or will. What you have is a hypothesis and nothing more at this point. To confuse that with reality is a dangerous mistake and to insist that other people accept your unproven theory as a fact or be branded, essentially, a heretic is irresponsible. It really does smack of the Inquistion and the treatment of Galileo, among other things.
(Despite the then-current consensus, it turns out the sun really is at the center of the solar system [guess they didn't use that term back then, huh.], and the contempt the heliocentric believers were subjected to at the time was misplaced. I have no doubt, though, that Galileo's persecuters were puzzled at his refusal to acknowledge the facts about the "true" nature of the solar system.)
I'm glad you are in a charitable mood, I mean its good to have someone explain to the unwashed how we are all idiots or morons.
I will note you are correct intensified hurricane activity in the Caribbean is predicted by climate modelers. Its been predicted every year since 96 that the hurricane season would be above normal. Its only been right once.
So far you are batting .1 probably time to go back down to the minors.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
is someone who wants to destroy our economy based on stuff that doesn't even make "theory" that can't be demonstrated, or reasonably modeled.
Or someone who cries "wolf" who has no clue how to effect a change that can be enforced in places like India, China and France.
Or someone who attributes every anomaly in the weather - hurricanes, lack of hurricanes, cold days, hot days - to "global warming".
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer
Anectdotal evidence is NOT evidence. You are correct. At least no more than "eyewitness" accounts of UFO's, Zeta Reticulans, and horrid weather. But leaving aside the debate about what the stats mean over the LONG haul (which you mentioned) and leaving aside for the moment whether cyclical variations like the one that gave us almost no ice in the time of the Vikings about 1100 years ago, you and I both know the following:
To wit: The Greens have used the "hot as hell" and "no time in recent memory was it hotter in (X Place)" and other anectdotals to try and bolster the touchy-feely side of Anthropogenic Global Warming---and of course to lay the blame on heat waves and arid weather on Industrial Man. Of course this generally means the West, since no one in their right minds expects China and India to follow the "sweet and loving green course" in energy production. You also know that the IPCC, a UN parastic organism, hails from an organization that is suspect in its own right in trying to access and control industry and has numerous political and philosphical reasons for making sure horror is befeft of hope unless we tax the living hell out of carbon effluent.
Industrial production is not going away. But it can be damaged and micromanaged by bureacrats and other busybodies, raising the prices for all of us and making a sick joke every election cycle when, as you know, economic conerns will once again trump everything else. I assure you pols of all stripes will not dare tread there or risk that.
As to Katrina, yes, nothing has been proven one way or another, but it WOULD seem for this alleged "scientific" point that we'd see a corresponding increase in the severity of CYCLONES (the south pacific version of hurricanes), if Global Warming models are correct.
We don't. And more intense 'caines than Katrina have hit the coast decades ago. IT seems some pols are more than willing, however, to take junk science and tie it to their own little fantasy worlds and ideological hobby horses to make a name.
What a shame. As Michael Crichton has said, the merging of science and politics is ugly, and VERY dangerous.
tags--such as communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative,and so forth--are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. --R. Heinlein
What source are you using for your assertion about tropical cyclone intensity?
(BTW - intensity alone is not the measure - the models predict a combination of intensity and frequency).
That's correct also. As with sex, intensity and FREQUENCY are key measures to keep in mind this Valentine's day.
Just kidding.
All emphasis and bolding below is due yours truly, just for disclosure and clarity. Dry stuff here for propeller heads, but numbers nontheless.
If cyclones are more intense or frequent off U.S. shores, they should also be so elsewhere as in the east Pacific, west Pacific, and Indian Ocean. No?
Remember, climactic change is global--not just local.
Think locally, act globa....
oh never mind.....
"This (increase in frequency) has not occurred," a June 2005 report from the Tropical Meteorological Project stated flatly. "When tropical cyclones worldwide are summed, there has actually been a slight decrease since 1995."
http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/Forecasts/2005/june2005/
As one person noted a while back after Katrina
"This isn't to say alleged warming is actually moderating these awesome storms. But certainly it's having no moderating effect on the blowhard buzzards ripping chunks off the Katrina disaster to promote their own dubious agendas."
____________________________________________________________
Warmest Regards,
--SWT
tags--such as communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative,and so forth--are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. --R. Heinlein
computer models are neat "little" tools... but when it comes to running simulations on something so complicated and unthoroughly (my word) understood as climate, their results are basically... crap. You cant include in a model what you do not know or understand. There is MUCH about climate that is unknown or not understood. Thus, one cannot develop a truly reliable model of climate... nothing to the sensitivity of a few degrees that is being purported.
I can run complex 3-d groundwater flow models all day - but they are limited by what I know about my system. I can come up with radically different results with each simulation by tweeking input parameters within an known and accepted range, and they will all be "reasonable" within the range of parameters and limitations of the computer code running the simulations.
Anectdotal evidence is NOT evidence.
Their position seems to be that evidence need not be considered if you have anecdotal evidence or to make it even simpler all you need are KnownFacts™.
Certainly man did not effect the previous ice ages and warming cycles. The current crude models that depict doom and gloom need decades of additional data as well as more sophisticated modeling techniques in order to mature. Despite the blow to ego, it's doubtful that man plays a significant role regarding climate change, and even more doubtful that anything meaningful could be done short of wiping out huge portions of civilization.
If ALGORE truly believes his hype, why is he flying around in chartered jets and driving SUV's?
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
While its never a good idea to go to a hospital until/unless you need to, that's different from saying they are deadly.
Though by correlation we COULD make that assumption.
After all, a heck of a lot of people end up dying and getting sicker in hosptials.
Correlation is the demon in stats.
--SWT
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
actually, you need to look well beyond decades and consider centuries and millenia. This earth is over 4.8 billion years old, 13,000 years ago sheets of ice 1 mile thick covered much of north america. The earth has been warming and sea levels rising since then as the ice has melted... decades just does not cut it.
A very simple analogy... why is it warmer in the summer than in the winter? More solar input. Why is that variable never discussed by the AGW crowd?
tags--such as communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative,and so forth--are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. --R. Heinlein
It depends on your perspective. Typhoon Saomai in June is said to have been the strongest typhoon ever to hit the Chinese mainland; it caused huge damage and killed at least 450 people. Cyclone Larry may be the strongest Pacific storm ever to hit Australia, and essentially destroyed the substantial town of Innisfail.
is your perspective that AGW is the cause of all of the evil in the world that can't be directly tied to white, American males.
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
Senior Writer
No doubt the official excuse is that it's because global warming has created wild swings in weather.
I do NOT recommend living in lowland places, near the shore, or in other areas where basically what you have is a gigantic sandbar that dumbunnies build on because they like the exotic flair.
That counts for any storm. Pawley's Island over here in coastal SC was CUT IN HALF by Hugo (merely 140 mph) as it was in 1822.
How much more of this crappola will people withstand before they take their poodles and winnebegos off the beach and stop saying things like
"Herbert, did ya take the doooooowg for a wooooooolk yet!!?"
The stupid shall always be with us.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Give the left a few months and they'll simply switch to the impending horror of Global Cooling, ice flows floating up Broadway, orange groves covered with glaciers, Grandma freezing in her bed, and inevitably "the chilern".
There is absolutely nothing a liberal can't do a complete 180 on without so much as a blink of the eye. The payoff and punchline will be new and artfully contrived ways to get us to suffer, raise taxes, and make life more than a little harder.
It's the one thing they do well.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
G. Brick,
You seem far too convinced that warmening is a fact. I am currently sitting in my nice little Manhattan apartment which some time ago would have been quite uninhabitable due to the ice sheet which covered it. Since it melted it seems pretty obvious that climate can change quite a bit without any help from mankind. Climate is driven by the sun and the sun is does not produce a constant level of energy. That is about as far as you can go and honestly say that you are dealing in FACTS. As for the "scientific consensus" your side is so enthralled with I would suggest some reading on the role of the h pylori bacteria in stomach ulcers for which there was quite a consensus AGAINST and is now thoroughly accepted. You people have actually politicized the weather. How very silly.
Never did that before all that CO2 hit the atmospheer and I started having truble concentraiting on things like math and spethlling.
Senior Writer
___________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...