The dratted snow is entirely messing up this global warm….errr, I mean…climate change thingy:
Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.
The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January “was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average.”
China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.
There have been so many snow and ice storms in Ontario and Quebec in the past two months that the real estate market has felt the pinch as home buyers have stayed home rather than venturing out looking for new houses.
In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, smashing the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto, pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.
Looking out from my neighborhood, I’ve noticed that Mt. Charleston has a much thicker snow cover than usual (yes, we’re in sight of snow here in the Las Vegas valley) – started snowing up there earlier, and has snowed up there far more often than I’ve seen over my 13 years in Las Vegas. Heck, even the hills behind my house have received several dustings of snow this winter.
I wonder what it all means? Oh, I know – it doesn’t matter; more snow = climate change. Less snow = climate change. Higher temperatures = climate change. Lower tempuratures = climate change. The perfect theory of everything – climate change.
Blogs For Victory 
Global warming update
http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm
Joe,
What about the windmills Kennedy killed?
What about the total lack of new nuclear plants?
Do you actually think that we could get away with building another hydro-electric project – anywhere in the US?
And, well what about those private jets, huge houses, big yachts, and fleets of SUV’s. NOTE – this does NOT just applt to Al Gore. It applies to all the rich Hollywood crowd. The Internet and software money. Opra. The Kennedys, the Clintons, the Kerrys, the Kohl’s, the Byrds, The Rockefellers, the Reids, the Pelosis, the Edwards, and on and on.
You SAY you believe it. Yet your leaders OBVIOUSLY don’t. They care little for conservation in their own lives. They kill wind projects that may spoil their view. The won’t hear of any new hydro or nuke projects. And they are OK with treaties shifting production (Kyoto) to less efficient and higher polluting nations like China and India. That looks more like wealth redistribution than good eco-sense.
Sooooo, just what are even talking about? YOUR OWN PEOPLE have killed or greatly hinder the three best alternatives to carbon emitting power. Water, nuke, and wind.
SEW:
First comment on that article you posted is…
That’s the real question. I have my theories and so I cut way back on my carbon footprint. But there needs to be much larger changes made that are out of my hands except as a consumer which doesn’t work with energy companies and vehicle manufacturers. Especially since Exxon is actively searching out and giving cash to scientists and General Motors ceo thinks climate change is a “crock of shit”.
Joe and MeatS……
two people who are completely out of touch with reality.
Joe – conflict of interest? It doesn’t matter what he received a grant for could be anything not climate related – fuel additives for cleaner combustion – in your eyes he is not qualified.
So when an environmentalist/politician , who receives money for pushing global warming – it is not a conflict of interest?
You are so simple minded it’s pathetic.
MeatS,
Can’t understand science? HAH! Your “example” of Timmy the Climate Change Bear is one step below Al Gore’s – A Convenient Lie. I am only pointing out conflicting evidence to the junk science you report as fact. Funny, how the measurements you people used before to show warming are now showing cooling. But in light of that evidence you simple ignore it.
It is obvious you did not read the article or are you too simple minded to understand.
Here are the facts once you get past the “weather pattern descriptions”:
“No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA’s GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.
Meteorologist Anthony Watts compiled the results of all the sources. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.
Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to REDUCED SOLAR ACTIVITY which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases. The dramatic cooling seen in just 12 months time seems to bear that out. While the data doesn’t itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it.
Let’s hope those factors stop fast. Cold is more damaging than heat. The mean temperature of the planet is about 54 degrees. Humans — and most of the crops and animals we depend on — prefer a temperature closer to 70.
Historically, the warm periods such as the Medieval Climate Optimum were beneficial for civilization. Corresponding cooling events such as the Little Ice Age, though, were uniformly bad news.”
MeatS, you are just another simple minded fool who swallows what Gore pumps his head full of without scrutiny.
Speaking of comedy gold, we have Almiranta throwing herself down on the floor and flailing away with balled fists and feet saying, “You’re a LIAR! Liar! Liar! Liar!” That’s certainly a lot more entertaining in 436 words than addressing the substance of the issue which even the AAPG has felt compelled to acknowledge.
Of course, we have the perfect example of psychological projection with the idea that the Global Warming Conspiracy, Inc. wants to harness the machinery of government to unscientific political ends when, in fact, that’s one of the primary punchlines (with the people of the United States as the butt of the joke) of the last seven years. One of its most obvious characteristics, to those not blinded by heart-fluttering devotion, is the Bush Administration’s blatant hostility towards science of which it doesn’t approve as in the unfortunately typical case of George Deutsch (oh, he of the faked resume and the “theory” of the Big Bang).
Of course, faux-conservatives are much like the White Queen in that they take pride in believing as many as “six impossible things before breakfast.” (I’m sure that reference to Alice in Wonderland will prompt Almiranta to feel yet another peculiar impulse to attack me as being “pseudo-erudite”) Thus, we have the martyred conservatives-as-perpetual-victims using their dying breath to blame the “Agenda Media” for their failures at governance. Well, duh. They have an agenda. It’s called satisfied shareholders which means corporate-friendly policies from which political party? The Republican Party, you say? Full marks for you, you clever lad!
I never try to argue about gloabl warming/cooling/climate change with Liberals.
I figure, they respect my religion, its only fair if I respect theirs.
I am simple-minded?
You are citing a meteorologist by the way. What is his training in?
This is a La Nina year. I’d say that has something to do with it. The entensity of La Nina is probably due to climate change involving the ocean somehow.
LiberalNitemare,
har har, nice joke.
And I’m an atheist. And I like nature. It’s too bad we as humans are wrecking it.
Kudos! Especially for those who supposedly actually give a shit about God’s Creation.
The White Queen was in Through the Looking Glass. She doesn’t appear in Alice in Wonderland. Unless your resource is Disney; which explains your understanding of politics.
Dasein Libsbane,
You are quite correct and I should have remembered it that way given that I own a copy of The Annotated Alice by the excellent Martin Gardner. I have scrupulously avoided the Disney version of Alice but thanks for the gratuitous insult, anyway.
SteaM, excellent job of dodging my questions. I always say, if you can’t dazzle them with your brilliance, then baffle them with your bullshit. Anyone else is welcome to take a stab at it. Winnowhead, bongoman, SAR, Joe, Diana, how about it? (Rico’s not eligible; he actually has some good ideas, although I’m not sure what, if any impact they would have on global climate.)
Here are the questions again:
Assuming you were King of the World and had complete control over everything and everyone; what past climate would you try to emulate, what would you do to get there, and what evidence do you have that the policies you would enact would, in fact, achieve the desired results?
Come on, I’ll even spot you one of the easiest answers: outlaw incandescent lightbulbs — I mean, that’s a no-brainer (literally, heh, heh).
which explains your understanding of politics.
Nice shot across the bow, Bane.
but thanks for the gratuitous insult, anyway.
It’s not like you don’t deserve it, Diana. You can dish it out, but you sure can’t take it.
Who says that I can’t take it, Retired Spook? I was just noting it. In general, I think you would agree that I don’t insult individuals in the manner that others are routinely insulted here.
And I do mean routinely…
There is nothing gratuitous in my insult. Perhaps a dictionary would help you out; in the meantime, since you leveled unqualified assault on Almiranta’s post, perhaps you could be so kind as to put some substance to your assertions.
Start here; if the “conservatives” are perpetuating “corporate-friendly” policies which, one assumes is in the interest of the nebulous enemy of the American people; the CORPORATION, then the antithesis of that would be the eco-friendly policies of the environmentalists advocating government control and care of CORPORATIONS to prevent or forestall AGW. How, then is Almiranta’s proffer, which you characterized as “Global Warming Conspiracy, Inc. wants to harness the machinery of government to unscientific political ends” inaccurate? Seems to me you’ve stated in paragraph the answer to paragraph three.
Having trouble keeping up? Then try this; you accuse Almiranta of using the epithet “liar” when in her post she clearly stated that you were being hypocritical; not lying per se. Can you point to an example where Almiranta accused you of lying? Didn’t think so.
Once in over your head I suggest Spook’s first rule of holes; pretend you have an important engagement and hope everyone will forget you were here.
First off….
Kahn, yes… we all know Kennedy opposed the wind farm. You people bring that up all the time too. And every time we explain that most Dems don’t agree with Kennedy in his opposition. Wait… there was another big name that opposed it too. What was his name?? I don’t remember. he was the Governor of Mass at the time…. Mitt something??
Next…. I love this comment when you talk about those riding in a fleet of SUV’s!
It applies to all the rich Hollywood crowd. The Internet and software money. Opra. The Kennedys, the Clintons, the Kerrys, the Kohl’s, the Byrds, The Rockefellers, the Reids, the Pelosis, the Edwards, and on and on.
That is too funny. You left off the other Dem whipping boys…. The Feingolds, The Murthas, etc.
How about giving Pelosi a little prop. She asked for a bigger plane to get to Calif and back to DC. The idea was that she can fly with more people that have to make that flight. That would save on gas! I don’t know of the “fleets of SUV’s”, so I don’t know what to tell you. Have you actually seen these fleets?
Tired, in your original question, you didn’t say what that the scientist got the grant for, so I assumed it had to do with something climate related or else why the hell would you ask me the question? Don’t be a fool.
The environmentalist/politician that receives money for “pushing” global warming is getting the money for his speaking engagements. Not for “pushing” a belief.
Don’t ask a question, then change the meaning of the question in order to play gotcha. It makes you look like an idiot.
Spook,
Did you read that blurb: “<a href=”Compact fluorescent lamps – those spiral, energy-efficient bulbs popular as a device to combat global warming – can pose a small risk of mercury poisoning to infants, young children, and pregnant women if they break, two reports concluded yesterday. “>Compact fluorescent lamps – those spiral, energy-efficient bulbs popular as a device to combat global warming – can pose a small risk of mercury poisoning to infants, young children, and pregnant women if they break, two reports concluded yesterday“?
If the enviro-whacks are saving us from global disaster, whose going to save us from the enviro-whackos?
I have not seen one liberal post that makes sense since I asked my questions above. So:
IF YOU ARE SERIOUS;
What about nuclear? Why are liberals blocking it?
What about wind? Why are liberals blocking it (The Kennedy ploy to stop it on the cape virtually stopped it everywhere)?
What about hydro-electric? Can you name a valley you think we could dam? may build a nice big power plant with all kinds of wires running to it?
Those hybrids, electric cars, and hydrogen cars have to get their power from someplace. The power you plug them into or use to extract hydrogen may not be converted on the road – but it has to come from someplace. Right?
So I ask you – why should WE take you seriously when your own leaders don’t?
I’d actually support more of any of the above projects. Doesn’t matter to me whether you’re right or wrong. But, is the ONLY solution you can come up with to shrink our ecomomy while big inefficient polluters like China and India increase theirs? How does THAT help?
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/02/26/mercury_leaks_found_as_new_bulbs_break/
Kahn,
Kennedy OPPOSED (didn’t KILL) the wind farm in Nantucket Sound. That is one Dem. Not the entire party. I don’t know what his opinion is of other wind farms.
Nuclear. There is that minor problem of the nuclear waste! Just a minor environmental issue. Who really knows the effects of that waste on the surroundings? Hey Noonan, you are in Nevada. Do YOU want that waste in Yucca Mtn? Maybe you don’t mind. I don’t know.
Find a good place for Hydro-electric. Let’s do it. Can you name any Dems that have opposed that? Maybe you can, I haven’t looked into it, but I haven’t heard a lot of proposals for it either.
So I’ll give you the Dems opposed/killed the Nuclear one, but wind and water were not killed by the Dems at all to the best of my knowledge.
So please prove that they killed these things and I’ll believe you. I’ll look it up as well.
Once in over your head I suggest Spook’s first rule of holes; pretend you have an important engagement and hope everyone will forget you were here.
Heh, heh; that’s worth a gold star.
Spook, Did you read that blurb: “Compact fluorescent lamps – those spiral, energy-efficient bulbs popular as a device to combat global warming – can pose a small risk of mercury poisoning to infants, young children, and pregnant women if they break, two reports concluded yesterday.”
Is that the report that said, rather than try to clean it up if one breaks, you should cut out the section of carpet? I sorry, you just can’t make this stuff up.
Yep, it’s a profit thing!!
I think Tim Robbins said it best; “Let me explain to you how this works: you see, the corporations finance Team America, and then Team America goes out… and the corporations sit there in their… in their corporation buildings, and… and, and see, they’re all corporation-y… and they make money.”
NOW it’s clear why we can’t let CORPORATIONS control what they do; they’ll make money! Damn them, anyway!
Well, it appears we’ve run through yet another global warming thread without any of our Lefties answering the question: how do we stop it? What’s the point if you can’t answer that simple question? Seriously, what’s the point?
Bane, I hope Tim Robbins has a smart financial adviser.