For the sake of political expediency, it's easier to deny man-made threats
to the planet than to confront the awful facts. This is especially true of
Republicans. I suppose that ignorance really is bliss, but nothing goes away by
pretending it isn't real.
This should have been published before December 21, then I would have been
impressed that there was still some sanity in this world.
For Pete's sake Des News, it's 21 degrees with a foot of snow at my
house right now. How cold would it have to be to make you feel like global
warming doom wasn't lurking around the corner?
Chilly, it's -28 C (about -18F) where I'm at today, although only a
few centimetres of snow on the ground. Nonetheless, this does not discredit the
evidence of man's influence on the climate. Merry Christmas.
Why do those of you who buy into this man made global warming nonsense get so
angry with those of us who don't? If you who have fallen for this hoax and
believe it, go ahead and sit in your hybrid, shut off your electricity, abandon
your modern polluting conveniences and go on believing you are saving the planet
and leave the rest of us alone while we enjoy our lives without all the
irrational fears that you embrace! Why try to force the rest of us to adapt our
lives to your fears?
Hutterite,No statistically relevant warming in the last 16 years,
despite atmospheric CO2 concentrations increasing by one twelfth. None of the
global warming doom and gloomers predicted this "pause". The climate
modelers have been dead wrong. I trust you are not using fossil fuel
for heating in your -28C location. Merry Christmas to you too. Try to relax a
Are you kidding me?This the kind of fools gold that has made Glenn
There is already enough wackiness in the world without adding any more.God doesn't need to do any work to bring about the end of the world.Just let us humans take care of it.We're already doing
a very good job.
@chillyWe're heading for the warmest year on record for Utah and the
U.S. We've had 14 record highs at Salt Lake City to 0 record lows this
year. "None of the global warming doom and gloomers predicted
this "pause". "The 2000s were .2F warmer than the 1990s,
not quite the 2-3C/century pace, but the idea that there is a pause...
why'd you pick 16 years? Because you're cherrypicking a span of years
where the first year was very anomalously warm (1998). Climate scientists use 30
year climate norms, but you can't use that, since it would get in the way
of the point you're trying to make. 14/14 warmest years in the modern
record are 1998-2011.@Mountanman"Why do those of you who
buy into this man made global warming nonsense get so angry with those of us who
don't? If you who have fallen for this hoax"I have a degree
in meteorology and obviously as a result also have a lot of friends who study
meteorology and climate and people like you claiming we're all fraudsters
promoting a hoax... and you wonder why someone like I could find it frustrating?
Shhhh. Be quiet, ATL. Facts only confuse some folks.
Its really cold here today and it is going to snow later. It may be warmer than
normal somewhere else today. Why is the fact that if is colder in some places
today than normal is not proof of the global warming hoax but some of you say
that because it may be warmer in other places today it is solid proof that
global warming is real?Atl 134. My doctor has a medical degree, has
a license to practice medicine and has studied for years but he has made
incorrect diagnosis many times to his admission. He is still a good physician
but isn't correct all the time, no one is! Perhaps he isn't alone?
One old man: "...ATL. Facts only confuse some folks..." Notice
that atl134 didn't refute my "facts". He merely accused me of
"cherry picking" the most recent 16 years. He did it by cherry-picking
even shorter time intervals.atl134,I'm thankful that we
are still having warm decades. Good for earth's inhabitants! We are still
emerging from the last ice-age. Some decades will be warm and others cooler. A
good student of meteorology would know that most of the all time US State heat
records were set in the 1930s. But that doesn't quite fit the narrative,
does it?My point (in my second post) is that the strong link between
CO2 and temperature, claimed by many climate scientists and used as the main
driver in the climate models... is being proved more incorrect with each passing
Didn't the dynosaurs die when the earth cooled? What caused that warming
and then subsequent cooling? Probabaly those selfish Triceratops.
@Mountanman"Why is the fact that if is colder in some places today
than normal is not proof of the global warming hoax but some of you say that
because it may be warmer in other places today it is solid proof that global
warming is real?"I would say neither are evidence for or against
on their own and are only useful with proper context. I am part of a
forecasting contest, I'm plenty capable of knowing how badly I can miss a
forecast. However, we have 100 years of data and a strong scientific knowledge
of how the greenhouse effect works. The evidence strongly suggests a human
component to recent climate change in addition to natural components which are
always in play too (it's not a coincidence that 2007 1998 and 2010 were all
El Nino years and are the top three warmest, in various orders depending on
dataset). @chillyTrue, we beat many 1934 and 1936 records this
year. The thing is, 1934 was not globally warm compared to present, only
regionally. Extreme anomalies occur. This year will be the warmest for the US
and 15-25 states but is set to probably be 9th warmest globally.
"It is hard to know exactly when it became acceptable for U.S. politicians
to be antiscience. For some two centuries science was a preeminent force in
American politics, and scientific innovation has been the leading driver of U.S.
economic growth since World War II. Advances in biology, based on evolutionary
theory, created the biotech industry. New research in genetics is poised to
transform the understanding of disease and the practice of medicine, agriculture
and other fields. The Founding Fathers were science enthusiasts.Yet
despite its history and today's unprecedented riches from science, the U.S.
has begun to slip off of its science foundation. Indeed, in this election cycle,
some 236 years after Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence, several
major party contenders for political office took positions that can only be
described as “antiscience”: against evolution, human-induced climate
change, vaccines, stem cell research, and more.
"By falsely equating knowledge with opinion, postmodernists and antiscience
conservatives alike collapse our thinking back to a pre-Enlightenment era,
leaving no common basis for public policy. Public discourse is reduced to
endless warring opinions, none seen as more valid than another. Policy is
determined by the loudest voices, reducing us to a world in which might makes
right the classic definition of authoritarianism.Postmodernism
infiltrated a generation of American education programs, It also infected
journalism, where the phrase "there is no such thing as objectivity" is
often repeated like a mantra.Reporters who agree with this statement
will not dig to get to the truth and will tend to simply present both sides of
contentious issues, especially if they cannot judge the validity of scientific
evidence. If the press corps does not strive to report objective reality, for
which scientific evidence is our only reliable guide, the ship of democracy is
set adrift from its moorings in the well-informed voter and becomes vulnerable
once again to the tyranny that Jefferson feared."(Scientific American:
"Antiscience Beliefs Jeopardize U.S. Democracy")
Mountanman,The frustration is because we have to move on this
together.Let’s say you and I live on a river and the folks
downstream are worried about water quality. You are careful not to pollute but
I toss everything I’ve got into the river. It will make only limited
difference what you do as long as I am still polluting, right?The
same with the atmosphere. We need a coordinated effort. It does only limited
good for one community or nation to restrain itself.There are cold
spots and warm spots on the planet and cold and warm days. The issue is the
global trend over time.And yes, doctors or scientists can be wrong.
But I notice you still go to one. Also, if you had a heart problem would you
really go against the advice of nearly every cardiologist?Chilly,Seriously, you need to look at better data. Businesses that rely on the
weather are making plans for long term change. These are numbers oriented folks
getting the best data they can for their business plans not wild eyed
environmental radicals.Why do you assume that you know what
professional climatologists do not?
My doctor is obligated to have malpractice insurance for when and if he is wrong
and people are harmed. Wouldn't it be interesting if climatologist and
environmental scientist could be sued for malpractice as well when what they say
causes harm to people while producing noting of value to society except
@chillySalt Lake City, UTMy point (in my second post) is that
the strong link between CO2 and temperature, claimed by many climate scientists
and used as the main driver in the climate models... is being proved more
incorrect with each passing year.2:48 p.m. Dec. 25, 2012================ Really?Tell us oh most intelligent one;What is the atmospheric compostition of our sister planet - Venus?[And her 400 - 600+ degree surface temperature.]Hint: it starts
with a Carbon and ends with Di-Oxide.
Re:MountanmanAnd what should be the penalty for the Republican
Party, if the 98% of scientists are proven right, that man-made climate change
is happening and is going to kill tens or hundreds of millions of people? What
should happen to those who stood in the way of measures to minimize global
warming/climate change? The stakes are pretty high to be be engaged
in this type of poker game.
@ airnaut Venus? You are trying to say Earth is becoming like Venus because of
I keep asking global warming deniers to get a tattoo so their grandchildren know
who to slap.But Christians as a whole including Mormons are "end
of days" kind of people which makes it hard to convince anyone that we need
to plan for 100 years in the future. The first Mormons were all convinced the
end was near as well. Don't laugh at anyone else until we laugh at
ourselves first. It's a shame to leave our children with an
environmental debt that can't be paid.
MountanmanHayden, ID@ airnaut Venus? You are trying to say Earth is
becoming like Venus because of CO2? LOL10:35 a.m. Dec. 26, 2012============No - I'm just calling right-wing-political
bull...oney to the retold Limbuagh-lie the CO2 is not a greehouse gas -- when if
FACT it is.The main atmospheric gases are carbon dioxide and
nitrogen. Carbon dioxide 96.5% Nitrogen 3.5% The large
amount of CO2 in the atmosphere ...creates a strong greenhouse effect, trapping
solar energy and raising the surface temperature to around 740 K
(467°C), hotter than any other planet in the solar system, even that of
Mercury despite being located farther out from the Sun and receiving only 25% of
the solar energy Mercury does.And no, this is not a LOL matter.BTW - Mountaman, I see you commenting here daily and having so many
answers, I'm curious -- For credibility's sake; what college do you
attend, what degree did you earn, and at what level of education did you
What is the right temperature? What is the right level of atmospheric CO2? Is
the effect of increased CO2 amplified by increased humidity or counteracted by
increased cloud cover? How much of the increased atmospheric CO2 is due to
warming oceans? How much Arctic melting is due to storms and ocean currents, and
how much to warming of the air? Are we really better off with less CO2, given
that plants prefer far more than we currently have? These are questions that
climate researchers are trying to answer. Those who pretend to have the answers
are, well, pretenders.James Hansen of NASA/GISS is fond of making
predictions. It has been more than twenty years since he predicted that New York
City's West Side Highway would be underwater in 20 years due to rising sea
levels. Are you sure it would be wise to fundamentally restructure the
world's governments and economies on the basis of what this man says? I
don't think so.
Pops,I leave it to others to suss out the details of Hansen’s
statements. But climate science is not based on one individual or one set of
predictions.Airnaut,Though this is no laughing matter,
unless you are saying we should all have advanced degrees in climatology, I
recommend not going down this path. We are all amateurs here.Mountanman,Yes he is obligated to have malpractice insurance. But
that doesn’t obviate my point. You still go to a doctor and (I assume)
listen to the best advice available despite the potential for error.All,We can argue about how much climate change is happening and
how much of it is due to human activity. But there are only two options for
outright denial.One is that every climate scientist is wrong but the
amateurs know the real truth. I know – it’s the money. Like the Al
Gore and the tiny green energy industry could outspend even a single oil
industry.The other is that there is a global conspiracy across
national, cultural, language, and political borders causing thousands of
scientists to lie. But who could exercise control over such a diverse group?
@Twin LightsYou apparently don't observe the climate science
community. There are plenty who don't agree with catastrophic AGW, such as
Richard LIndzen (MIT), Roy Spencer and John Christie (UAH), Judith Curry
(Georgia Tech), Roger Pielke Sr., etc. There are, as the popular media likes to
observe, many scientists who don't do primary climate research who have
hopped on the bandwagon on the assumption that the peer review process would
(should) weed out obvious silliness. So because your "outright denial"
is a straw man, your two options are meaningless.The trick by which
the science was corrupted was (and still is to a great extent) that control of
the relevant scientific journals - and with it the peer review process - was
coopted by a few folks with a political agenda. It will be an interesting case
study once we manage to collectively get back to reality.Speaking of
predictions, we shouldn't forget what Dr. David Viner (CRU, East Anglia)
said 12 years ago, that within a few years winter snowfall would become a very
rare and exciting event, and that "Children just aren't going to know
what snow is."
@airnautThere's one little catch about the Venus thing. Yeah
absolutely CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but one of the quirks with the radiation
spectrum is that eventually when you add more and more CO2, the less additional
warming you get from the greenhouse effect part of it. The main reason why Venus
is so many degrees warmer than Mercury is because of the sheer pressure (93x
that of Earth if I remember right) and so you get a higher temperature based on
the ideal gas law where pressure and temperature are positively correlated.@PopsThere's a quirk about sea level rise. Lately the fastest
melting areas have been Arctic sea ice. But think of a glass of water with ice
cubes. Ice is less dense than water. When it melts it takes up less space as
liquid water than when it was ice. So sea ice melt, or at least melting of the
portions of sea ice below the ocean surface, actually slows sea level rise.
It's when continental ice melts that the sea level rise occurs. (Granted
there's also thermal expansion of water with warmer temperatures).
Melting sea ice has no effect on sea level. Arctic sea ice melt is driven
largely by ocean currents and storms. For example, read about the effect on
Arctic sea ice of the "great Arctic cyclone of August 2012" in
Geographic Research Letters. And no, the cyclone was not caused by atmospheric
CO2. Cyclones and hurricanes have always happened and always will, and are
happening at a lower than normal rate at present.
at Mountanman Dec. 25"Why try to force the rest of us to adapt
our lives to your fears?"You mean like society is crumbling
because we have allegedly shunned deity? at Mountanman Dec. 26 Is this doctor you mention a psychiatrist & can we sue him for
incompetency?So, the left uses climate change like the right has
been known to use terrorism? Rather pathetic for both sides.