Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Bill Steigerwald :: Townhall.com Columnist
Cool News About Global Warming
by Bill Steigerwald
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


You've no doubt seen the stories about strange snowfalls in Saudi Arabia. A brutal winter in China. The heaviest snow cover in North America, Siberia and elsewhere since 1966.

And if you are a vigilant observer of the global warming debate, you know how inconveniently cold it is in the Arctic this winter for Al Gore and his army of climate alarmists.

But how cold is it, Johnny?

Well, NASA says recent satellite images show that the allegedly endangered polar ice cap -- which will melt completely one of these summers and kill off all the polar bears if we don't slash our greedy carbon footprints and revert to the lifestyles of medieval peasants -- has recovered to near normal coverage levels.

That's what Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, told Canada's CBC News -- the Canadian government's version of NPR/PBS - on Feb. 12.

As far as Google's search engine knows, Comiso's comforting report has appeared nowhere but in Canada.

There's even better news for polar ice-pack lovers from ice expert Gilles Langis, who says Arctic ice is now even thicker than usual in spots. A senior ice forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, he's another scientist you shouldn't expect to see talking to Anderson Cooper on the next episode of CNN's "Galaxy in Peril."

Meanwhile, in other news too climatically incorrect for U.S. mainstream media to touch, California meteorologist Anthony Watts says January 2008 was the planet's second-coldest January in 15 years.

Even more shocking, the average temperature of Earth dropped significantly from January 2007 to January 2008. As Watts explains on his Web site wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com, he determined the lower figure by crunching data from four major public and private global tracking sources.

You may remember Watts from last summer. He popped up in this paper and on Fox News because of his self-funded project to quality-check 1,221 ground weather stations around the country that are used by NASA to measure the "official" average annual temperature of the United States.

So far, Watts and his volunteers have checked out more than 500 weather stations (none in Western Pennsylvania) to see if their temperature data can be considered credible. As he details on his other Web site, surfacestations.org, nearly 70 percent of the sites fail to meet the government's own standards because they are not 100 feet from a building, are on blazing rooftops, sit next to air-conditioner exhaust fans, etc.

Watts was shocked and surprised to find such unequivocal proof that Earth's temperature has cooled in the last year, he said to me Wednesday. But he's very cautious about what it means in either the short or long run.

Calling it a "fluctuation" and "a large anomaly" compared to the 30-year running temperature average that climatologists use, he emphasized that the cold spell is "no indication that global warming is over" but does "illustrate that the driving mechanisms behind our planet's climate are still very much in control of changing the climate and that the planet's not in the death grip of CO2 just yet."

A careful, honest man of science, all Watts would say for sure was that his findings and all the strange cold-weather events of this winter prove only one thing so far -- that "Mother Nature is still in control of things, not us."

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Bill Steigerwald, born and raised in Pittsburgh, is a former L.A. Times copy editor and free-lancer who also worked as a docudrama researcher for CBS-TV in Hollywood before becoming a reporter for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and a columnist Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Bill Steigerwald recently retired from daily newspaper journalism..
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Todays highs will be in the 50's
with lows in the...never mind, we do not report lows now. Look for warm weather!

Don't expect
to hear about this with any of the MSM in this country. But lets not forget everything can be blamed on Global Warming even unusual cold temperatures.

Oakley

No matter what the weather
We are causing it together,
even if hell freezes over!

What will the AGW nuts do next?
"Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon."

Do your part to stop sun spots! Demand that politicians take action!

And I had such high hopes
For milder winters and longer growing seasons.

Who Cares?
Can we send this article to John McCain..............please!

Finally, Some GW Sanity
The Heartland Institute is holding a conference in NYC today in which GW "deniers" state their case. Go to http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/ for details.

The Lie is in the Driver's Seat
Facts simply don't matter to those pushing this agenda. Thirty or so years ago we were all gonna be burried underneath another advancing ice age for the same "carbon footprint" reasons.

I guess they figured that couldn't be visualized easily enough so as to present any significant degree of imminency to the "mob," so they had to change it to warming instead of cooling.

Either way, facts have no role in the debate by those using this to further fascism/socialism.


It's all about Control
Global Warming is the new venue hiding the same old purposes of the eco-activists: There are far too many parasitic humans burdening Mother Earth. We need to foresake evil capitalism, and live the simpler lives of our ancestors. What this really means is that five billion of us need to disappear, and we need our behaviors tightly controlled by an elite who "knows best". The approach is anti freedom and anti human development. Let's cut through the retoric and see this for what it is.

The observatios of Lord Acton and Machiavelli hold up quite well today.

New parody on Global Warming
my blog.

As we speak
the snow blowers are firing up outside to take care of two inches of Global Warming that fell overnight. According to our weather man, by 8:00 tonight more Global Warming is expected to dump both Global Warming sleet and Global Warming snow that will last for the rest of the week.

Sadly we have returned to our regularly scheduled Canadian Winter. Drat.

HALP,HALP
I just saw an icicle melting and i'm sceered!!

There's so much wrong with BS' analysis
that it could fill a book.

What matters is not merely the ice cover, but the thickness of the ice. And of course, one year does not a climatological trend make.

The trend for cover in the Arctic is downward and troubling. Ditto, Greenland -- which really matters, as that ice is on land -- where the loss of glaciers is far greater than predicted.

There is an opportunity in fighting global warming: what we do to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels affects our balance of payments. We should go green for financial reasons; that it probably benefits the environment is an added bonus.

Good for Watts
Now he can collect his $10,000! It'lll help pay for the huge gas prices for his SUV.

'Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today.

Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).'

It doesn't matter
what the evidence of fraud is. The people who are pushing this fall in one ogf two categories, those who wish to advance their scheme through any means and thus the fraud and those who worship at the shrine of environmentalism and believe any lie fed to them on that score.

The rest of us are going to be fed the huge tax increases and the new "regulations" that provide for congressional influence peddling via the carbon trading fraud.

We will get this because ALL of the current candidates are signed on to this fraud. The ONLY one who wasn't was Fred Thompson.

I got tired of waiting for GW years ago,
and moved to AZ.

Having endured winters in WY most of my life, also MT, ND, MN, and UT, I've damaged the circulation in my extremities being out in conditions down to 70 below zero. That was the wind chill factor up in the derrick of a couple oil rigs I worked on and then of course there were the times I was tramping through the deep white stuff in pursuit of the elusive Wapiti or huddled over a hole in some ice with a fishing pole with no shelter (those are for wussies) or running a snow machine flat out.

It just about can't get too hot for me, but anything below 50 begins to get uncomfortable.

I like my globull warming. SHUT UP, Algore!!!

roadmaster
You're warm, but when do you get to eat tasty Wapiti?

I'm shocked
I'm shocked that Townhall.com is not letting the left and the neocon globalists get away with this opportunity to tax and cede to UN control. This may be a first. That last small dying ember of real conservatism. Maybe it will blossom now that aristocrat party patriarchs are dying off.

It's all about power
People like Al Gore are all about power. He doesn't care one bit about global warming or any such environmental crisis. If he did, he wouldn't personally have such a high "carbon footprint." He doesn't put his money where his mouth is, because he knows it's a lot of hogwash.

No, the reason he is trumpeting the global warming alarm is to get everyone so worried about it that they will put their faith in him to solve the crisis.

He didn't make the cut to become president, now he is choosing the path of environmental prophet to gain power. If he can't be president, he will be the high priest of the Grand Temple of enviro-nuts.


John Coleman, founder of the weather

channel happened to be on FOX this morning...

With decades of experience under his belt, he thinks algore needs to be sued...

The so called "data" is skewed and manipulated, and this is one of the biggest hoaxes ever....

Get over it, warmies!


Carbon credits
are needed only for those in Washington DC that insist on polluting the rest of their country with hot air. Since Gore got his nobel award I am convinced that it isnt just the dumbing of America we need to be concerned about but that of the whole world. Maybe the award should be renamed the "Chicken Little" award.

beastie boy BS
"one year does not a climatological trend make. "


Fine. Good point. Another point: the temperature of the Earth's atmosphere has risen by roughly one degree in the past century (if, that is, last year is not taken into account AND the temperature measurement data are valid). Then why oh why, beastie boy climatologist expert, does your side project this 1-degree TREND to become a catastrophic 5-degree (or more) "trend" over the next 100 years, hmmmmm?

Give it up, pal, you've lost. There is ZERO correlation between atmospheric temperatures and human CO2 emissions over the past 200 years. Overlay the respective charts and see for yourself. Then, unlike Al Gore, go take some science courses and pass them.

For those who need to worry
Even if the global warming is not true rest assured those of you who need to worry about something. The Solar system will warm. Eventually the sun will expand and consume the earth regardless of the efforts of mankind. A possible fix for this is to keep funding NASA so they can find you a new home before the year 1,000,000,000.

Steigerwald, You Missed a Big One
At dailytech.com, do search on - global cooling - to see the current picture of warming. From the primary sources of weather info, including NASA, comes the alarming news. This past year wiped out 100 years of global warming trends. I have not seen the article, or similar info anywhere else. Owlgore might say that it is fiction.


DARN IT
I wish all this global warming would stop causing all this global cooling.

I was hoping for more milder winters.

Hey beastie boy
Slide on over to hillsdale.edu and check out S. Fred Singer's lecture on GW. He's Prof. Emeritus of Environmental Science at UVA, probably knows as much as Algore. He explains, in plain English, that CO2 levels have no correlation to warming, going back a million years or so.

It's that darned old sun warming us up, just as it has ever since the planet was a planet. Ever hear of an ice age? WTF melted all that ice, or did the cave men have Hummers? AGW is a load of bovine excrement, and some of you folks are buying it by the ton.

Carbon Footprints
After a couple more winters like this we should greatly increase our Carbon Footprints.

Do you think Algore will have his new company set up by then to make money increasing the carbon footprint for people?

Taft
Re: your 7:26 post.

Thank you for the Joseph Goebbels report of the day.

roadmaster
Amen!!!!

I could use twenty more degrees of warming!

$$$$
Its all about the MONEY and SCARING our YOUNG.
Liberal teachers love using our young to try and set standards for all. The LIBS always use the young or old when they try to prove a point.

WHY?

I would type more but the BLOBULL WARMING is freezing my finger tips. Before this is over GORE will take credit

To Taft
"an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration,"

I love when the left uses these ominous phrases to somehow make a point. As if anything with "links to the Bush administration" must be tainted with trouble. Of course, there is no definiton as to what those "links" are exactly. Trace around the origins of much of Washington, D.C. power and you will find that organizations have "links" to politicians of both major political parties. It is absurd to attribute any one of these to one particular party. Money is money, and both parties need it.

With that said, global warming is an overblown hoax that will end up costing us all before it is over. It will not cost anything in terms of actual weather-related issues, but it will ultimately be the means to take away more of our rights and money and concentrate additional power in the hands of a few elites. The snowball (if you'll excuse the pun) has already started to roll downhill on this one, and it's going to be very difficult to stop it. Plus, we do not seem to have any politicians who are even remotely interested in doing so.

Scientific research
If all the global warming nuts did their research, they would find out that there was an age where there were no polar icecaps. The entire earth was a tropical rain forest, and the weather was hot and humid, and LIFE FLOURISHED VERY WELL.

tommy
I'd be happy as punch if GW were a hoax. Isn't it a bit thick though to prove its debunking with t.v. weathermen like Watts or others who are being payed off by Exxon-Mobil?

"Feb 1, 2008 ... Exxon Mobil announces record profits, the highest ever for a U.S. company."

Tell me your not just the least bit skeptical.

Just a thought
I noticed one day last summer that the temperature in our local Wal-Mart parking lot was almost 15 degrees higher than the temperature two miles away from the parking lot.

CO2 Is A Trace Gas
Nitrogen and Oxygen make up 98% of our atmosphere. CO2 makes up.....now get this.... 0.000385% of our atmosphere. Water vapor is the elephant on the block after N & O2.

A trace gas can't affect anything. Its a big fraud. But... I guess the guy who invented the internet can do big things! LOL

Links to the Bush Administration!
Taft:
"an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration,"

How about the Climate Scientists who have been funded to the tune of $5billion/year under the Bush administration. Oh, The Humanity! 5 Billion in climate research! They must all be in Bush's pocket! AGW caused and promoted by GWB!!!

Comiso said otherwise, and B.S. knows it
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0914-02.htm

http://future.iftf.org/2006/03/new_nasa_polar_.html

Sorry, I'm also having trouble finding anything to help further the Right wing agenda. I'm beginning to wonder why that is? Th writers would be surprised to find that the scientists they use to "prove" their case are angry at the misrepresentation of their work.

On the other hand, Bill would not be surprised. He knows he cherry-picked, and he knows that Comiso would be upset at the misrepresentation. Take a look at the above links, and pay attention to who Comiso is and what he has researched and written.

So I wonder why it is so hard for a Con to find anything to refute science? Why has ID failed so miserably except in the most uneducated portions of America? Why do only oil companies, tobacco companies, and non-scientists sit on their side? Don't you guys ever do research?

Another reason to hate Wal-mart
nick38 writes: Tuesday, March, 04, 2008 9:17 AM
Just a thought
I noticed one day last summer that the temperature in our local Wal-Mart parking lot was almost 15 degrees higher than the temperature two miles away from the parking lot.
-----

Is there anything not to hate about Wal-mart. Really, they are singlehandedly bringing on the apocalypse.

It's 2008
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0914-02.htm
(Posted September 16, 2006)

http://future.iftf.org/2006/03/new_nasa_polar_.html
(Posted March 8, 2006)

----

Perhaps nothing has changed since then, but the current article is about January 2007 to January 2008 data. Yes, rational thought conservatives do our homework, and we tend to complete it on time and in the current year.

GW and GC are a function
of the sun's radiation. All the solar system's planets have been warming and any indication of earth's changes are in concert with other planets and moons.

That what is occurring on the earth is NOT from greenhouse gasses is that the earth has experienced surface and not atmospheric warming. Satellites have rarely reported any atmospheric temperature changes.

GW, esp. MGW, is an invention of the left to constrict energy use, lower standards of living, creat ec. havoc that socialists can step in to control, and just another facet of Marxism that has died everywhere except Cuba and among the West's liberal whackos.

Algore
Everyone by now must know that the man who invented the internet is actually insane...also evidenced by the Hollywood nuts who gave him an Oscar! Algore needed something to sooth his wounded ego - guess global warming was the only things other nuts would buy into!

All skeptics are quacks
Professors at Harvard, astro-physicists at NASA presidents of countries, founder of weather channel, climatologists, all quacks in Exxon's and that evil GWB's pockets. No need to consider that maybe the "conventional wisdom" is possibly wrong.
When I was in high school (last millenium) we were warned about the new ice age coming, and no one dared question the "conventional wisdom" of the day.
I saw two scientists (real scientists with no affiliation with Exxon) on Glen Beck and they stated that prediction of global cooling or warming is as accurate as if done with the toss of a coin.
"Conventional wisdom" still states that global cooling will have more of an impact on crops than global warming, actually global warming will increase usable farm land.

Damn cooling
I guess that Mars has probably stopped warming too, and we will not be able to force the evil rich to pay their fair share of the costs for our best-of-all-solutions nanny government to remove the SUVs from Mars. http://www.poorgrandchildren.com

The earth's
temperature cannot be measured with any degree of accuracy. There are no tools to do that. Nor will there be in the future unless the temperature should rise maybe 15 or 20 degrees.

Common sense should tell us that.

Acroos the street 71 degrees
at your house 70
the next block 68
acroos town 73
30 mile west 62
etc etc etc

A little common sense--please

billg64
I guess I had better start quacking then because I am extremely skeptical since history is full of weather doomsdayers.



Quack, quack, quack.....

open for debate
Global warming, global cooling, caused by man, natural occurrence, warming good, warming bad; none of these subjects are closed debates. But to make social, educational, and economic decisions based on one un-proven side of an argument is ridiculous.
We all -yes even us evil nature hating, baby killing , oil drinking gun toting conservatives- agree that reduction of pollution is a good thing, unlike health care, breathing is a right. The irony is the same environmentalist that tell us we need to clean up our act will protest construction of nuclear plants, wind farms off the coast of Massachusetts and solar farms in the west. Their aim is destruction of our lifestyle and they are willing to use bunk science to do it.

The whole discussion
is leaning on the scientific issues. Most poeple are less interested in the convoluted and arcane thoughts required to really understand even small parts of global climate as a whole. They are much more interested in their wallets.
The discourse should concentrate on possible monetary savings through the use and devolopment of replacable or natural energy sources thereby reducing the ammount of money and energy used in the reforming of energy into a useable form.
Envrionmental scientists (weathermen) are like doctors - they're just practicing. If they really knew, think how much more they would charge for their services.

How about those eco-terrorists?
ELF has claimed responsibility for the multi-million dollar arson attacks in Washington state.

Question: Are 'domestic activists' that destroy property and threaten human life faced with the same penalties as a terrorist?

If not; WHY NOT?

Supervolcano
If the super volcano in Yellowstone, or Tambora, has a catastrophic eruption and a Ice Age results, will AL Gore and the enviro wing nuts allow us to drill in anwar and allow a coal fired power plant to be built?

Oh that's right, the end result will be the same, if the enviros have their way.. billions of people will die. that is what they want, so maybe if they pray to Gaia enough, Yellowstone will take care of that little problem for them.. people.

Grampa
frequently said " This would be a wonderful world to live on if you could just get rid of all the poeple!"

Snow in Arkansas
Not that snow is unusual but we had 10" in Russelville accumulate overnight and it's till snowing here in Little Rock. Given the record lows in China this year there is no way in Hell they will sign on to any plan to reduce emissions of CO2 so if we in the West do we're going to kill our economies to the benefit of China et al.

And as an aside the Earth Liberation Front burnt a few homes to protest our "out of control consumption" of energy. Funny how they, and other enviro groups, are so silent on immigration when a growing populaiton is much more detrimental ot our environment than a few big homes. How much energy do 20 million illegals consume?

inthemajority
I'm sure you've been trying to divert this thread onto other subjects, but you might want to educate yourself about ID. I would recommend picking up a copy of SALVO issue 4. Some of the following should be attributed to that issue.

There is a lot of misinformation about ID.

ID is NOT Creationism

There are other aspects that you might want to also explore to gain a better understanding of what ID is and is not.

Food for thought: SETI (the search for life outside our planet) sends out, and looks for the return of patterns, which is pretty well accepted as evidence of intelligent life.

Why then, is it so absurd to look at patterns in the natural world and see evidence of intelligent design? It may not be proof, but to discount it as a possibility is pretty poor scientific research.

ID scientists look to an 'intelligent designer' because that is where their research points.

National geographic
National geographic channel (they really do have the coolest shows) is airing a show about the earth after man is extinct displaying how all of our creations will disappear, it looks like a fun watch. My point is, that show is like a wish list for the environmentalist and global warming nuts (not everyone that believes in man made global warming is a nut, but there are many nuts that believe in man made global warming).

aDNA, Tom the Tinker, AudiR10, pandm,
roadmaster, Knight Who Said NI, Lolo1 and all,

I love you guys!

It's a good day when I can start my day off with some good hearted chuckles. Thanks!!

For those of you who believe Al G., sure let's try to be better stewards over what we have. But, not with tax dollars and another government office of whatever; and especially not the U.N.!

Sun spots!! Did you know when we started putting all the GPS satellites up they designed them to withstand 10,000 times the worst case blast of protons and electrons from the sun? Know what happened just a few years ago that blanked out several of our satellites? If you guesed we had a solar storm a few million times the worst best guess, you'd be right. Know what causes solar storms of these magnitudes? Sun spots.

Interesting how we get the lessons in order by varying degrees of magnitude. We get things figured out at one level - you know what's going to happen next, crank it up. Gobal warming - global cooling, could it be a race?

Is Mother Nature related to God? What a sense of humor He, She, They have!

Well, Mrs. Paddy
If I recall the global cooling hysteria correctly, ELF should properly be commended. Those fires released a lot of particulate matter into the atmosphere (smoke) which would contribute to decreasing insolation, in turn leading to global cooling.

On the other hand, they probably released trace amounts of carbon dioxide, so maybe it's a wash.

@ inthemajority: Regarding Science
"So I wonder why it is so hard for a Con to find anything to refute science? Why has ID failed so miserably except in the most uneducated portions of America? Why do only oil companies, tobacco companies, and non-scientists sit on their side? Don't you guys ever do research?"

I'd like to ask one simple question, then follow up with an admittedly somewhat snarky rhetorical statement.

The question is: Do you, personally, actually look at the given evidence in such cases, or do you simply look for something that 'sounds right' and verifies your own preformed reaction? I acknowledge that I, personally, have trouble avoiding the second at times - this doesn't mean that I'm suddenly free from the responsibility to realize this and attempt to clean myself of it.

The snarking: When you speak of refuting 'science', which one do you mean? The official 'Let us look at the data and see where it goes' version, or the latest pronouncements from the High Technists in their white lab robes?

elf attack
boys 'l be boys

bill64
As to destroying our standard of living and reducing everyone to third world status, the left thinks that's a good way for them to be able to step in and control everything.

They forget that third world nations that still gather wood for fires, have no medical care, drink bad water, and can't afford educations destroy more environment and ecology than all the developed nations together.

The nomads of Africa are helping to spread the Sahara desert through use of goats and cattle that eat all the thin vegetation and even destroy plant roots.

And I never notice the enviros miss getting on tv or flying around on expensive jet fuels. They are like the rest of the left that doesn't expect anything to change for them because they will be at the top of the heap running everthing.

Our goal is to stop them.

Funny stuff
Mrs. Paddy writes: Tuesday, March, 04, 2008 10:09 AM
"There is a lot of misinformation about ID.

ID is NOT Creationism"

Really? No, REALLY? You mean that you refute the very same authors of Creationism who used search/replace to rewrite their books (yes, they replaced the words "Creationism" with "Intelligent Design")?

Really?

Are you one of the minority from Dover PA?

I'm sorry, I just can't get over the fact that there are so many duped people in the world. ID/Creationism has nothing to do with science.

tommy
writes, "Plus, we do not seem to have any politicians who are even remotely interested in doing so."

Not true. Senator James Inhofe ranking member and former chairman of the Environment Committee has been practically single handedly stopping Barbara Boxer's proposed regulations in the Senate. We have some good legislators. They are just few in number. Conservatives either buck up to the party leadership or convert to liberalism when they reach Washington. Mine do the former. Most do the latter including Juan McCain.


billg64
Have to disagree with your boys 'l be boys post.

The latest stunt by ELF (as well as many others they have taken credit for) does nothing to further their cause, and imperils the lives of firefighters. What happens when their 'protest' kills someone?

I have ZERO support for them. They are terrorists, criminals and should be held accountable in the harshest terms.

Not funny...
Just informed. Educate yourself before you lump everyone into the same mis-informed soup you find yourself swimming in.

Global Cooling Scare
It should be noted that the global cooling scare of the 1970' did NOT come from scientists; it came from environmentalist activists. The warnings of the first ice age premiered on the first Earth Day.

It all balances out
In the future ice age we'll all be driving Snow Cats which produce more CO2 than Hummers. That (according to Algore) will rewarm the planet causing us to revert to our hybrids which will cause the planet to cool which will....

Didn't y'all ever hear about the balance of nature?

always warming
The climate is always warming, no matter how cold it gets. Those that don't agree are just in global warming denial. Wearing coats in winter is a form of global warming denier syndrome. Recording temperatures that are below the average are symptoms of global warming deniers syndrome. The world is warming no matter what, no matter how cold it gets. Period. That's what Steve Running of Missoula MT says, and he's a winner right along with Gore, so he should know.

Doesn't matter that the world has been warmer and that we are coming off of the coldest period in the last 1000 years. The world is dieing, we are destroying it. Can't get around that kind of logic.

Enviromental Wacko's
want power and control. First the doomsday form of killing the planet was acid rain, then it was global cooling. Or was it global cooling first and then acid rain. (I cant keep up with it) That didn't work, so now it is global warming, um, at least until these last couple months. I guess Al Gore needs to change his fear mongering tactics and make a new movie. His religeon is becoming frozen in the new ice age.

As for me, I could use some warm days in this freezing cold weather, and I can't wait for summer! If we could only have a few degrees warmer we could raise more food to feed the starving people in third world countries and we could save on energy and cut those big bad carbons down. Too bad big Al wasn't right. Sigh.

Ender
I ask the real scientists. I read the real scientific articles. I have relatives in large universities who teach topics in biology, and have researched flora and fauna around the world for various organizations including The Smithsonian. I have relatives who are state and more recently nationally recognized for their efforts in wetland research and species migration, in particular migratory birds.

I just spoke with my cousin (one of the several who teaches biology) and asked him if it was true that there are more scientists named "Steve" than there are "scientists" who think GW is a hoax. He laughed a bit, then told me that he has personally not run into a denier, but they have read about them. He has had many meetings with 1000s of scientists who understand science, how to measure, how not to measure, how to ask, how to debate, how to play devil's advocate...

He and his peers still wonder why America is so caught up in the very small minority of so-called scientists who want to work for BushCo.

Yes, I'd totally agree with you that I follow the real science, listen to the real scientists, and do some reading on my own on real topics with real research. I accept the peer reviewed consensus, and throw away the crap.

By your questioning I'd have to ask if you ever had a science class in college.

IRREFUTABLE proof AlGore® is LYING
FACT #1: AlGore® and the rest of the AGW LIARS claim that burning fossile fuels are causing the Earth to fall into the sun, yet AlGore®, EVERY SINGLE DAY, flies around in a private jet to exotic locations around the world. That private jet consumes more fuel in ONE coast-to-coast flight than a Hummer H1 consumes in an entire YEAR!

FACT #2: AlGore® and the rest of the AGW LIARS claim that oil companies are responsible for countless scientists PROVING they are lying, yet AlGore® HIMSELF is one of the largest stock holders of Occidental Petroleum.

FACT #3: AlGore® and the rest of the AGW LIARS claim that we need to cut down on our energy consumption, yet AlGore® lives in a home that consumes more energy in a single month than the average home consumes in a YEAR!

FACT #4: AlGore® and the rest of the AGW LIARS claim that we are destroying our planet with pollution, yet AlGore® himself collects royalties from a zinc mine, one of the most polluting mines on Earth, located on property he owns.

AlGore® and the rest of the AGW loons are nothing but lying fascists trying to remand us to the impoverished 7th century while they live the high life. Don't believe them for a SECOND!

If Global Warming is Caused by CO2
what caused the glaciers to melt after the last ice age?

It is a verifiable fact that much of North America was covered by ice and glaciers as recently as 12000 years ago. And all that ice melted long before the invention of the internal combustion engine or the coal-fired power plant. So what caused this to happen if, as Al Gore and his acolytes claim, global warming is due to manmade CO2 emissions?

It is also a verifiable fact that millions of years ago, the entire planet was much warmer, and that tropical type vegetation existed almost to the arctic circle. Given the time frames involved, is it not more likely that the "correct" temperature of the earth's surface is actually higher than it is today, and that any increase in the median temperature is in fact a move back to normalcy?

But wait. Al Gore can't make money off of that, so that can't be right. As with all things political, if you want to know the truth, follow the money. Global warming is a scam cooked up by people with agendas that have nothing to do with helping anyone but themselves.

Haven't we heard this before
THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!

Over the past 50 years it seems there is always a new threat to human existence!
1. New Ice Age
2. Population Bomb
3. Avian Flu
4. Second Hand Smoke
5. Flesh Eating Bacteria
6. Mad Cow Disease
7. Heterosexual Aids
8. Hole In Ozone Layer
9. Radiation & Radon Gas Poisoning
10. Man Made Global Warming
11. DDT In Food Chain

These are just the ones I remember. Why do the chicken little's of this world continue to be heard? Does the media tend to love the end of the world story?

Beastie Boy
Why then is the ice cap thicker in the Antarctic? Is that also due to global warming? Why does AlGore buy his carbon credits from a company that he is the principal stockholder in? Is science really in the business of looking for "a consensus"? I thought that scientists were searching for "the truth" and were open to opposing viewpoints if only to further cement their position. You might also note that the scientist in question was quick to point out that his study does not necessarily indicate a trend and certainly did not go on to "declare all debate over". FYI-only an idiot would declare that all debate must end. Did you know that there are about twelve (known) variables concerning weather and temperatures? Did you know that the best supercomputers in the world can only consider two or three of these variables? Did you further know that, linking every supercomputer in the world together, they could maybe consider a fourth variable but would take years to get any results? Kinda deflates the computer predictions, doesn't it? Nice try, though. Next!

paddy
purely sarcastic sorry

AudiR10
Just a note to let you know that nobody says "Drat!" anymore. In fact, nobody ever used that phrase except Snidely Whiplash. ;)

Jim
Read Michael Crichton's State of Fear. He explains it very clearly:

If they can't scare you they can't control you.

It doesn't matter what the scare is. They just have to have something to keep you scared of so they can "save" you from it.

Beastie
The problem is, that the evidence for man made global warming is weak.

We can look back in time and see evidence of radical climate change that took place before industrialized man. The Saharah desert was lush rainforest some 10 to 12 thousand years ago.

There is a vast area of rock in antarctica where all the ice cover has melted. According to scientific data the ice has been gone for thousands of years. Ice ages have covered much of the northern hemisphere in glacial sheets which in time recede.

With all this evidence of past climate change, does it not seem a bit arrogant to think we have caused the more recent and far more minor changes?

As for getting off fossil fuels, that will happen regardless: it is just a matter of time. Something better always comes along. I doubt very highly if we will be using internal combustion engines one hundred years from now.

To Clarify further
from page 36 Salvo issue 4

'What ID is NOT
"The Opponents of ID are Evolutionists"
Wrong...It is primarily the scientific naturalist -or Darwinist - with whome ID advocates take issue. The difference? Scientific naturalism is a philosophical position that ASSUMES an entirely materialistic origin to the universe-a faith claim for which Darwinists have no proof whatsoever-while evolutionary theory is a multifaceted set of assertions that attempts to account for the present diversity of life here on Earth, some specific aspects of which most ID scientists accept as fact.'

There is a lot of misinformation out there. Your family of scientists notwithstanding, you might want to inform yourself of what is true and what is biased.

I think it is really funny that an entire avenue of thought is thrown out the window because it doesn't fit the template...

What do your relatives think of the textbook
Explore Evolution by Hill House Publishers?

@ inthemajority:
"I have relatives in large universities who ...particular migratory birds."

Please give them my congratulations, then.


"I just spoke with my cousin (one of the several who ...scientists who want to work for BushCo."

Does this include scientists from outside the United States? I've seen comments (written form) to the effect that the scientific establishment in the US doesn't tend to like those who break consensus...I don't recall the attribution (I'll try to find it), and I'm likely to misstate the quote, but my favorite was from a scientist from either China or Russia: "In my country, we're allowed to disagree with Darwin, but not the government. In the United States, you're allowed to disagree with the government, but not Darwin."


"Yes, I'd totally agree with you that I follow the real science, listen to the real scientists, and do some reading on my own on real topics with real research. I accept the peer reviewed consensus, and throw away the crap."
Is 'crap' anything not peer-reviewed, or are you willing to look at non-peer-reviewed topics also?


"By your questioning I'd have to ask if you ever had a science class in college."
Two semesters of chemistry. My major was Computer Science, but I'm fairly sure you're going to be unwilling to consider that as a branch of Science in general. (After all, even I don't lump it in with Physics or Chem.)

Lysenkoism returns...
It's really disgusting to see the return of Lysenkoism...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko

...in the guise of man-made Global Warming.

It's even worse to see it take on the guise of what amounts to a secular-humanist religious fanaticism amongst people who would be deeply offended if you suggested that they were possessed of religious tendencies.

It's also scary to see the commercial basis of our economy characterised as Satan incarnate by these idiots.

billg64
sorry for jumping on you, I probably over-reacted.

It just really angers me when people destroy stuff they claim to care about (these were 'green' homes)....how many trees went up in smoke? How much water was used to fight the fire? How much run-off has polluted the surrounding streams etc? Not to mention the smoke etc.

I just hate waste.




pandm
To paraphrase the old Chinese saying, "Man with ten thermometers has no idea what the temperature is." I have two identical thermometers in my tiny apartment. They are separated by about ten feet. They have different readings. What is the temperature in my apartment?

"What is the temperature of the Earth?" is a question like "What time is it on the Moon?" or "How do you know that the colour you call red and the colour I call red are the same? What if your mother is colour blind and she told you that Real Red was, like, brown?" That is, it is a question for college students to debate instead of finishing their homework.

global warming is bunk
in 1976 lowell ponte pubished "the cooling" (it is available at amazon) which describes the last 30 years weather pattern.

the planet earth is cooling and we are probably experiencing all manner of climate change that occurs as we go into an ice age.


inthemajority
Sorry, but science has NEVER used the line "the debate is over, we know this to be true" (and no, I'm not claiming you stated that directly). That's why things like gravitation are still called "theories". Even when refered to as laws, it is noted that there are exceptions that have been noted, and it is expected that further exceptions will be found in the future. All theories only hold up as long as they have not been disproven.

Discarding the results of astrophysists who talk about solar cycles in favor of computer models is the antithesis of science "it has been decided, therefore we don't need to talk any more".

Stop trying to sell us phlogisten. (from the history of coal.... the thinking was "science tells us that rock doesn't burn, and coal is rock, therefore there must be a fluid called phlogisten locked within the rock that burns. The theory held up until someone weighed the ashes before and after a burn and found a net gain of mass rather than the decrease that was expected when the "phlogisten" builded off)

oneeye
Thanks for heads up on Michael Crichton State of Fear.

a side not sort of
last night on the Glen Beck show (he is dedicating a lot of time to the global warming conference in NY) the president of Czechoslovakia(had to use spell check on that one) stated that the soviets used similar tactics as are being used in the global warming debate to push toward socialism. They came up with fell good scams that every one rallied around and detractors were called fascists and idiots, The end result was government control and communism and enslaved masses.
He stated that the people in the communist bloc countries are able to see it happening over here because of their perspective.

Declaration of Independence - 2008
2008 will be a year when the insanity of ignorance is cast aside for the benefit of civilization. The new Declaration of Independence will be signed by the people at the ballot box......
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/03/04/declaration-of-indepe ndence-2008/

inthemajority
I almost took your last post to be reasonable up until you stated:

"He and his peers still wonder why America is so caught up in the very small minority of so-called scientists who want to work for BushCo."

Apparently your definition of a "so-called scientist" has nothing to do with credentials and everything to do with whether they toe the line on global warming. Personally, I value the opinion of a credentialed scientist over a biology teacher any day.

Bushco !! What a pathetically childish statement.

madrassas
So the earth is warming because the solar effects, but snow in China proves the earth really isn't warming? This is the logic that's supposed to convince people? A true indication of a cooling trend would be for the glaciers to extend the miles back to their positions a century ago. That hasn't happened. Has any GW-believing scientist ever claimed that there would be a continuous straight line warming trend?

I'm sure the madrassas in Saudi Arabia are chearing on your scepticism. They'd like the cash flow as long as they can get it.

PRESS COVERAGE?

.....The convention in NYC of scientists who dispute the claims of man-made Global Warming is getting virtually no press coverage ...why? ...

.....Only Glen Beck on CNN is covering this event while on FAUX NEWS which is supposed to be right wing and conservative ...Bill O'Reilly is holding body language seminars and salacious reports of kiddie porn ...Geraldo Rivera is pushing his open borders agenda with sob stories about children of illegal aliens being taunted in school by evil bigotted children of caucasian nativists ...and Neil Cavuto is doing another special on Victoria Secret models ...this is right wing? ....sounds more like the Playboy channel to me .....COLOSSUS

Real scientist
"Dr. Duncan Wingham, Professor of Climate Physics at University College London and Director of the Centre for Polar Observation and Modeling, has presented evidence that Antarctic ice is growing. According to a December 15, 2006 article in Canada's National Post, "Early last year at a European Union Space Conference in Brussels, for example, Dr. Wingham revealed that data from a European Space Agency satellite showed Antarctic thinning was no more common than thickening, and concluded that the spectacular collapse of the ice shelves on the Antarctic Peninsula was much more likely to have followed natural current fluctuations than global warming." "One cannot be certain, because packets of heat in the atmosphere do not come conveniently labeled 'the contribution of anthropogenic warming,' " Wingham said, noting that the evidence is not "favorable to the notion we are seeing the results of global warming." Wingham and his colleagues found that 72% of the ice sheet covering the entire land mass of Antarctica is growing at the rate of 5 millimeters per year. "That makes Antarctica a sink, not a source, of ocean water. According to their best estimates, Antarctica will ‘lower global sea levels by 0.08 mm' per year" the National Post article reported."
Ref: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority .SenateReport

Note his name is not "Steve." And there are hundreds more where he came from.

For the Foundation (1 Cor. 3:11) of the Founders ><>

BDS is political science
It permeates everything the liberals stand for now.

It is nothing new however, I remember back when everything was Reagan's fault, then it became ReaganBush, then we had a 8 year holiday when Camelot II was here, and it was paradise on earth, the homeless disappeared for 8 years, we had no enemies,and peace reigned throughout the land.

Then the evil Karl Rove and Bushco stole the election, and, well you know the rest.

Now the left has its new messiah, and it is only a matter of time, when we find out that THAT emperor has no clothes.

People who look to the government to ensure their personal freedom and happiness will have neither.







To Concerned @ 5:48 AM:
Great post – you hit the nail right on the head!

Cam
When are you warmies ever going to get it through your thick skulls. The scientific observations that indicate that the earth is in a warming trend are not in dispute. It's the mish-mash of speculation and prediction driving the we-caused-it-and-we-can-fix-it crowd.

The debate is NOT over!!

mutty the tanker
Amen.

bds????????????????
the worst cases of bds were right here on townhall during the immigration debate.

bush was called every name in the book from facist to socialist.

to try and now pin it all on liberals is farcical.

i mean only 30% of americans approve of bush and 70% of americans are not liberals.

religous lib
you make my point for me.

Re: Wiggy @ 11:20 AM
“the planet earth is cooling and we are probably experiencing all manner of climate change that occurs as we go into an ice age.”

So if we’re actually going into a cooling period, and the global warmers have insisted that more carbon dioxide warms the planet, will they then encourage us to ENLARGE our carbon footprint? What an interesting dilemma for them. No – regardless of how the data changes over time I'm sure that the science will be, um, adjusted so as to continue to support the enviro-activist agenda.


cam
c'mon, you speak as if your argument centers around our support of the enemy in the middle east through oil revenues. But isn't it the environmentalists that are preventing drilling in America or construction of green power plants (nuclear, solar in the west, wind in the east)?

Spring is coming...
That means that Global Warming is just around the corner. The rest of us call it Summer.

LNC

religous lib cont.
I know what President Bush was called, and I heartily disagreed with that sort of discourse. To be fair, I also disagreed with the way Clinton was depicted too.

I have my issues with President Bush, he has disappointed me in some of his decisions, NCLB, Campaign finance reform.. the huge expansion in the federal government.

Having also said that, I hate it when people say hateful things about Pres Bush about the decisions he had to make, esp regarding the GWOT. It is easy to armchair quarterback, but it was his decision to make. I personally think he made the right decision, but sold it the wrong way. WMD was a loser, I think that he and most of the intelligence agencies worldwide believed he had them. The overall stratagem, to my way of thinking is sound. Fighting them "over there" and trying to create a democracy, where there really has never been one, is far better than the alternate, which was to do nothing.

Yes, nation building is hard, not easy, and in some cases not appropriate,and some people would say it is impossible. But then, just look to a saying by another Liberal Icon, Bobby Kennedy "I dream of things that never were, (democracy in the middle east) and ask why not?"


Last night
it snowed in the DFW area, one of the latest snowfalls recorded in the area in the last 50 years. Real global warming there.

Meanwhile Mars Heats Up
Mars is experiencing global warming. In a completely unrelated development, SUV's were seen roaming the surface of the red planet.

mutty the tanker
i supported bush on immigration and a few other things.

i have never insulted him and am simply trying to make the point that blaming liberals for bds is not accurate.

conservatives exhibited it just as much.

Concerned--so true!!!
Yes, these supposed eco-conscious, man-made Global-warming fearmongers are much scarier than their most gloomy disasterous forecast.

Here are just a few stories from numerous sources...and there are many more:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22782918/

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/302392

http://tjcoop3.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/unusual-cold-kills- 4-in-israel/

http://www.eumetsat.int/Home/Main/Media/News/005199?l=en

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local//index.php?ntid=27189 0

http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?i d=332289


Global Warning not Warming
Bill;
Yes, we have had a very cold `END TO WINTER', but one season does a prediction make. And One Svientists remarks do not make it `FACT'
Our planet is in trouble and we as a spiecies may very well be also. We are not 100% certain how so many other spieces have died out on this orb, but we can say 99% with accoracy that they once lived and are now DEAD!
So why is it you are against conservation. Where you denied the prevledge of climbing a tree.
or did you hate raking them that much.
Do you prefer breathing with a gasp or mask over deep inhaling of good clean air without soot, carbon dust, ashes from unburnt fuels.
Do you like to see the seasons change but want to deprive your grandchildren of this beautiful sight.
No your just to caught up in being right with your smugg rich domineering bosses. They are so full of it they feel they are above any harm by what they do. And true they will not suffer should it go bad, they will be long DEAD.
BUT NOT THEIR GRANDCHILDREN WHO WILL CURSE THEIR VERY NAMES WITH EACH LABORED BREATH OF .......

true enough RL
There is enough of that to go around. My side is guilty of that too. I know our discussion is off topic on this column. I disagree with you about bds though.. at least 75-80% of the most vitriolic comments come from the left. I also agree with you on this, there are crazies on both sides..

alright, ya'll are killing me
What is this BDS mutt and religiouslib refer to? Not the first time nor the last, but clueless here...

for that matter, what is the A in AGW? I get the Global Warming part, but I am too dense today to catch the A. Help a poor brother out!

There is no "normal"
There is no "normal" in weather. There is only the average of one extreme year with its opposite.

A look back through geologic time will show that the true norm is to cycle between heat and cold, drought and flood.

Cuvier and Agassiz made many important contributions to science, but the idea that the earth remained in stasis except for periodic catastrophe has long been disproven.

I don't have ready access to the detailed data and statistical analysis is not one of my strengths, but I would be extremely surprised if any single year since record keeping because was precisely "normal" with the exact average high and low temperatures, exact average rainfall (distributed as rain, sleet, and snow in exactly the average proportions with the precise average distribution for each month), exact average number of tropical storms and hurricanes with the exact average number making landfall in the exact average locations, and so on through every conceivable data point.

However, if there were such a thing as "normal" in weather we would expect to see a large number of years very close to the average with only a few, abnormal, extreme years. But anyone who has lived long enough to achieve the age of reason knows that each year differs significantly from the year before in one way or another.

trends
Minky - "The scientific observations that indicate that the earth is in a warming trend are not in dispute."

Then why is there all this euphoria in the column and in this thread over heavy snowfalls this winter?

billg64 - 'Not sure where you get the idea that your "argument centers around" your support of the enemy. My point is that the lauding of the Hummer lifestyle is also in the interest of mideast terrorists groups. Republican candidates admitted as much in the debates. (Although conservatives crucified Ariana Huffington for making the same observation years ago.)

"But isn't it the environmentalists that are preventing drilling in America or construction of green power plants (nuclear, solar in the west, wind in the east)?"

It seems a majority of Republicans have chosen a nominee who also opposes drilling ANWR. There are some isolated cases of environmetalists opposing wind turbines, but they surely don't constitute a trend. Democrats in congress are now trying to get a bill through promoting solar and wind energy. This environmentalist has a roof covered with solar panels

Not AGW, its "Climate Change"
If you ask a true believer about the current cooling trend, he will explain to you that it is still "climate change". Basically, Greenpeace et al have rewritten the rules so that no matter what the weather or climate does, man is to blame.

They have created a truly non-falsifiable hypothesis.

Worse still, they could even (as they have about past "eco-crises") claim success in overcoming the (imaginary) problem.

We need to find a way to teach the MSM a lesson about buying into every Chicken-Little that comes along. Maybe start a theory the 24hr news coverage causes shooting sprees...

Butcher
Do you speak in hyperbole in your normal conversation?

craig
BDS is "Bush Derangement Syndrome", throwing a fit of nypholepsy whenever Bush's successes (or even his name) is brought up.

The A in AGW is "anthropogenic", meaning caused by man. It means a discussion on whether warming on a global scale is being caused by man's activities.

I'm a "denier" in that I believe that if global CO2 levels dropped to half tomorrow there would be minor differences in the global climate, but if the sun's output dropped to half tomorrow we would all be dead by the following week. (In other words, we humans have very little to do with it, natural fluctuations in solar output easily account for the current differences.)

craigctx
BDS = Bush Derangement Syndrome

AGW = Anthropogenic (i.e.man-made)Global Warming

Hope this helps.

Butcher---
Well you certainly "butchered" your statement all up. You seem to really be mixing apples with oranges here. Certainly conservation is a good thing. I mean even Ben Franklin has you beat on that one..."Waste not, want not!" Manipulated science has been encouraged by AGW fanatics and their MSM cohorts in crime to the point that it has become an accepted fact. Science is not consencious driven it is based on extensive research even when it doesn't agree with your hypothesis.

But wait - there's MORE
Did you notice that many hand wringers are now referring to "climate change" which is appropriately vague. Such a cool alarmist phrase.

If temperatures remain the same or begin to drop, the alarmists will blame it on climate change.

Don't expect an apology.

On Science...
Most people will be shocked to hear that science does not prove anything. It's not supposed to. The way it works is that somebody comes up with an idea about the way something works. This is known as a theory. Theories are never proven. Instead, a scientist will design an experiment to test his theory and once the experiment is conducted, the results will either support or not support the theory.

Experiments are supposed to be conducted in such a way that they are free from bias introduced either by the surrounding environment or by the researcher himself. Experiments are also supposed to be conducted in such a way that the results can be duplicated by both the original scientist and anyone else who wants to attempt to test his theory. The results of any subsequent runs of the experiment will either tend to support or not support the theory. Scientists publish the experiments and their results in order to contribute to the total body of scientific knowledge and so that the theory can be further tested or modified by other scientists.

No theory is ever proven, however. All theories are subject to testing and challenge at any time. That is the very nature of science. Some theories have stood the test of time and repeated experimentation while others have been either modified or have fallen out of use because of a lack of supporting evidence. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS. The phrase is an oxymoron.

Scientists who try to say that there is consensus are betraying the very foundation of their profession. I knew global warming was a bunch of hooey as soon as I heard there was scientific consensus. THERE IS NO SUCH THING. Anyone who says so has an agenda and should not be trusted.

Cam
While I agree that pointing out the extreme views and actions of some members of s movement do not invalidate the core beliefs of the movement, there are serious problems with the science involved in "Climate Change". Specifically, what would prove your theory wrong?

The reason we on the right are so happy with the temperature shift is that it is consistent with our model for climate change. We believe that as solar output comes down from its peak, global temperatures will drop. We expected this change to come fairly soon.

Now, it would be irresponsible to declare a long-term trend on the basis of one cold winter, but it certainly COULD be the beginning of a cooling trend, and cannot reasonably be called part of a continuing warming trend.

Later folks
AGW Heretics UNITE!

Liberal/socialist have us in this fix...
They oppose wind farms in their own backyard, ie see Kennedy's. They oppose drilling in ANWR and ANYwere else in America. They oppose Nuclear power plants. They oppose clean burning coal power plants. They've pushed this ethanol on us as a cure all. Yet, it is driving up the cost of food astonomically. (By the way, how's that going libs?) They oppose the war which almost all of them claim was for oil. Gas is now $3-4+ all over America. Yet, these boobs have us dependent on murderous thug dictators like Chavez(also their hero,) Ahmendenijihad, the house of Saud,...why do these people have any power let alone drive the agenda.

inthemajority
"I ask the real scientists. I read the real scientific articles. I have relatives in large universities who teach topics in biology, and have researched flora and fauna around the world for various organizations including The Smithsonian. "


Fine. So then why do you attack the real science performed by private organizations such as oil companies? (Do you even know, Mr. Scientist, what is involved in getting that gasoline into your SUV?). Is it that only university scientists grubbing for government funding are doing real science in your opinion?Your statements on ID are right on, so why do you get religious when it comes to AGW?

Let me help
I am starting a company to sell carbon debits for those of you who just won't use enough to keep our temperature up. Here's what you get for your money. I will buy a house bigger than Al Gore's mansion and even less environmentally(green) friendly. I will ride around in limos and private jets. If enough of you care about the earth to adequately support my project I will buy more houses and rip the insulation out of them. More SUV's. My driveway will look like a Hummer showroom. If you don't support me, I'll just assume that you don't care about the earth and especially you don't care about the children. I'm in it for them! And the money and power of course. And we need to do it now before the science is in as to whether this trend will continue.

buzzkat
inthemajority may not want to hear, (cover those ears) butt an actual scientist Astrophysicist, Dr. Sallie Balunas, says GW is related to the sun.

"Dr. Baliunas' work with fellow Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics astronomer Willie Soon suggests global warming is more directly related to solar variability than to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, an alternative view to what's been widely publicized in the mainstream media."

catscratchfever
You're preaching to the choir but keep it up. Good job!

craigctx
""What is this BDS mutt and religiouslib refer to? Not the first time nor the last, but clueless here...

for that matter, what is the A in AGW? I get the Global Warming part, but I am too dense today to catch the A. Help a poor brother out!""

Happy to help craig.

BDS stands for Bush Derangement Syndrome, a phrase coined by Cjarles Krauthammer to describe the mental condition afflicting so many on the left, that causes them to blame everything on George Bush. (from the economy to the fall of rome)

The A in AGW stands for Anthropological (man made)


In an aside to our friend Butcher.

I think it's time for your meds my friend, you're getting that "Charlie Manson" look in your eyes.

buzz - feeding the trolls
If inthemajority were really interested in the history of biology then he'd know that records like the Japanese flowering-of-the-cherry trees date and pollen records from southern Ontario Canada both show huge changes over the last 1500 years. The Beech trees that were dominant in southern Ontario 1000 years ago can't even survive there now because it's still too cold. Biologists & geologists tend to be some of the more sceptical opponents of AGW. Astrophysisists too.

I don't know about astrologers... I think they're on the AGW bandwagon.

cam
news flash: a majority of conservatives have not voted John Mccain to carry their banner.
We would be able to nearly negate the need for middle east's oil if we had been able to explore our own shores for fuel. Every avenue ought be explored including oil reserves, coal, and other solid fuels, nuclear wind, wave, solar and other. The real argument here is using bunk science to dictate that we neither use foreign oil or find our own.

butcher
sounds like you've listened to one to many episodes of Captain Planet

Cam
Cam asks:
"Minky - 'The scientific observations that indicate that the earth is in a warming trend are not in dispute.'

Then why is there all this euphoria in the column and in this thread over heavy snowfalls this winter?"

Did you even read the column??

Referencing Watts' comments, Steigerwald says:
"Calling it a 'fluctuation' and 'a large anomaly' compared to the 30-year running temperature average that climatologists use, he emphasized that the cold spell is 'no indication that global warming is over...' "

Now contrast that reasoned, thoughtful, and scientific statement with the hysteria, hand-wringing, dire warnings, and "euphoria" from the warmies that occurred in the wake of Katrina.

GOREBULL WARRING IS A HOAX
The reason that so much of this planet has had drought for so many centuries is that we’ve been in an ice age, and the water needed for normal condensation has been frozen into glaciers. Glaciers are frozen water needed as condensation for barren and frozen lands of this planet, causing drought and flooding. When glaciers melt, some water runs into the oceans. Some water thaws the ground below where the glacier was, and soaks into the ground. Some water evaporates into the upper atmosphere where it becomes normal rainfall for the whole world.

The heat of the sun, and the absence of cold from glaciers and sea ice will cause more water to be evaporated from the oceans, lakes, and rivers into the upper atmosphere than there presently is; and the winds will blow it evenly around the world, providing normal rainfall world-wide, even where there presently is drought, and barren and frozen land, preventing flooding.

The worldwide rainfall will cause long-dormant seeds in barren lands to sprout and grow into new plants; the best way to go green. The new plants will inhale carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen, which we breathe. There will be so many new plants, that we might have to increase the amount of carbon dioxide we generate, to provide enough for all of them

A glacier in Greenland is melting, returning the land to the way it was a millennium ago. Larger crop yields are already the result, and the codfish have returned. Put the UN there.

Snow fell before leaves, and a month before winter started. Parts of the country have record low temperatures. We’re entering another ice age. We need global warming as soon as possible.

C_Miner
"Biologists & geologists tend to be some of the more sceptical opponents of AGW. Astrophysisists too.
"

Which in fact, most of the "scientists" on the UN NAPAP panel are NOT! (and many have resigned from NAPAP in protest of its bias).


There are many many scientific studies that debunk AGW. Here is one in particular that is a great smoking gun.

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2007/09/25/ques tioning-20th-century-warmth/

GW Advocate
I'm all for global warming. Global warming means fewer lives lost to freezing weather. I agree with Ron: "We need global warming as soon as possible."

Cam seems to take the typical Democrat line that, if everyone else is doing it, so should you. And we'll arrest you or take your money if you don't. If everyone else jumped off a bridge, Cam would be right there in line, not just waiting her turn, but pushing you to the front.

"This environmentalist has a roof covered with solar panels."
For solar panels to do any good on my roof, I'd have to cut down several trees. But this would contribute to "Climate Change" so I don't dare. I guess I could "offset" my offense and pay Al-bore-tross. The trees also lower my cooling bill in the summer, so that cutting them would cause me to consume more electricity. I guess that would be ok, though, as long as it's solar electricity. The sun has nothing to do with the global temperature or climate change.

Those solar panels sure do have a lot of petroleum products in them, though. But I'm sure they got it from enviro-friendly sources. Maybe whale blubber, or that really good stuff in baby seal fat!

I’m sure I’ll get accused of being a redneck conservative for my thoughts. Well, we rednecks like to conserve too. That's why I’ve posted an article on the ways that rednecks are more environmentally friendly then the typical sandal wearing, granola chewing, tree hugging liberal.

re: buzzkay @1:55
Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen that data set before.

It's another good nail in the "it's all our fault!" coffin.

Solar Power from Space
And, of course, the gorebull climate change nuts won't even consider the development of solar power from space because cheap access to space and all the resources out there would mean people could escape from their control.

Frightening power-grab by AGW kooks.
Last year or the year before, the US Supreme Court ruled that CO2 should be classified as a "pollutant" merely because it is a "greenhouse gas".

Basically what this did is give authority to the EPA to regulate CO2 generation without any actual legislation ever being passed by congress.

Now let's forget the fact that every time we exhale, we produce more CO2 (imagine a bunch of jackbooted thugs in black ninja outfits carrying German sub machine guns threatening to shoot your dog, your son, your wife, and your friend because you are "polluting" the environment by breathing), water vapour is ALSO a greenhouse gas.

In fact, while CO2 constituted about 3% of the total greenhouse effect, with manmade CO2 making up only half of that, water vapour constitutes **75%** of the greenhouse effect!

Are you AGW kooks out there telling me that WATER is ALSO a "pollutant"? That is, at least, what SCOTUS has said by calling CO2 a "pollutant".

beowulfe
That is what the greens would have you believe but that is not what the Court said. What they ruled was that the EPA could not just throw it out without justification. The EPA has to come up with a "study" that shows CO2 is NOT a pollutant.

aha!
So they were right when they told me 35 years ago that we would all die in the new Ice Age! I knew it.

Don't worry, the same government who can't possibly stop illegal immigration will protect us from the sun. or the Snow. whichever.

RE: Vic
In essence, that means the same thing. What the court said is that EVERYTHING is a pollutant until it is "proven" otherwise (whatever that means). It is a dumb decision, based nowhere in law or the Constitution (as if the Constitution grants authority to SCOTUS on determining what is and is not a "pollutant"), and was aimed at one thing: enhancing the power of the government to control our lives...which is basically what the science-hating quacks insanely pushing the AGW agenda are seeking as well.

I agree with...
Mother of 4. Here in Western Colorado we have but two different weather patterns during a year. We have either the normally abnorl year, or the abnormally normal year. Been that way for the 60 years I have lived here.

.

Before
I was for global cooling I was for global warming.

CVN65
DRAT! (Also CURSES! FOILED AGAIN!)

People who do not curse say Drat. It has a nice, satisfying sound to it. A recent coach of the Buffalo Sabres used to say "SHOOTFIRE!" I recommend them both to AlGore 9000 and anyone else who has worn out the Only Two Words.

P.S. to the gentleman who took the trouble to look up the spelling of Czechoslovakia. You are too late. There is no longer any such place. There is the Czech Republic (where there is a very good FIA GT race this fall) and there is Slovenia. Both easier to spell, too.

Did you hear?
AGW adherents are in a new scandal! It's called
Food for Oil!

Adaptation
The Earth and everything in it adapts to change, and maintains an equilibrium. Mankind is one of the best at adapting. So, don't worry so much about CHANGE...ADAPT!

There are too many things outside of our control (Sun cycles and Volcanic activity to name just two) to make any kind of precise prediction of what the world will be like for posterity.

ADAPT or DIE...just like in nature. The Earth is not in our control. I choose to believe that the Universe is in God's hands, but you don't have to believe that to understand that in the greater scheme of things, what we do is a very minor and miniscule part of the whole.

Go back and re-read the story of Chicken Little. I understand that Al Gore has a copy on his coffee table.

Then take a reasonable approach to weighing the costs and benefits of 'green' technologies. When in doubt use the rubric that Men are more important than Animals and Plants. We can be good stewards of Earth and protect what we value (I like nature too) without mass hysteria.

Everything has consequences...The use of Oil and Gas has improved our lives. Anyone wish to go back to the horse & buggy and whale-oil lamps? It is stupid to use Food for Energy/Oil.

There is no shortage of recoverable oil...just a shortage of the good sense to go after and refine it.


Hi, Gene!
I'm not living in denial! How many times do I have to tell you people??!! I'm a Global Warming Advocate! I'm burning a pile of tires and idleing three Hummers as we speak in order to speed up Global Warming!

I hate cold weather. More people die every year from the cold than the heat. More ocean covered areas means more healthy fish and whale for people to eat. (or if you prefer, kelp.) By all means, Higene/lowiq advocate for global warming. Do it for the kids!

HIGENE
"like Al Gore, who are trying to do something about it, will not reverse that inexorable trend."

Yea Al Gore is doing something about alright. I'll take global warming seriously if the goreale gives up his big mansion that consumses probably twice the energy as the average household. I take global warming seriously when he and others like him stop flying those Lear Jets that put more CO2 into the atmosphere than the average jet it's size. I'll take global warming seriously if he stops riding in those gas guzzling limos.
BTW Can scientists account for the fact that the artic ice sheet is actually expaning and is thicker in some places?

Higene
Wrong, the last 20 year average for the US 1985-2005 shows a decline of over 1 degree Fahrenheit according to the latest climit data.

What are they afraid of?
This past weekend, hundreds of the world's leading man-made global warming skeptics converged on New York City. Where was the news coverage? Why are the Al Gore's of the world so afraid of face-to-face debate on the issue? I guess it's much easier making a one-sided "documentary" and preaching in front of adoring crowds, otherwise known as Kool-Aid drinkers. Come on, Big Al, let's hear you debate your "facts" against the scientists who have evidence to prove otherwise. The public deserves the truth, not just your truth.

"Scientists meet in NYC to challenge Gor

U.N. Hundreds of experts assert 'alarmists'in climate debate 'have had their say.'"

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58024

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

"Global warming is a natural process, not likely the result of human activities, argued more than 100 internationally prominent environmental scientists in papers presented at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, which concluded in New York City today.

"The conference, organized by the Heartland Institute, sought to refute the contention promoted by Al Gore and the U.N. that there is an "established scientific consensus" that human beings are causing the earth to warm catastrophically. The event attracted more than 500 people, including scientists, economists, policy experts and members of the public from around the world.

"The purpose of the conference is to provide a platform for the hundreds of scientists, economists, and policy experts who dissent from the so-called 'consensus' on global warming," said Joseph Bast, president of the Chicago-based Heartland Institute. 'This is their chance to speak out.'"

"Is global warming 'An Inconvenient Truth,' as Vice President Al Gore charges, or a 'Global Warming Swindle?' Harriet Johnson, spokeswoman for the Heartland Institute asked in a statement distributed at the start of the three-day conference."


The tide, it is a-changin'..... Finally. Thank God!







hygene
I'm sorry your earth god let you down. Being a Druid is tough some days...

Anne
I wish the MSM had given the coference a tenth of the coverage which they gave to the Al Gore around-the-world concert tour last summer. One of the scientists at the conference this week was asked how many press people came to interview them. He said he saw one news person there all week. Global warming is supposed to be destroying the world and the MSM won't even cover both sides of the issue. Ain't that amazing!?

Gambler5112: Exactly!!!

Boggles the normal and rational mind, doesn't it?

But, if nothing else, we'll have some fun debating this gloBULL warming with algore's "Warmies" for a while...

Someone, on a different thread last week, asked if algore would have to return his "Prize" and Oscar once it's out in the open what a hoax this gloBULL warming is and what a fraud algore is.



Anne
Al can keep his Nobel trophy on one condition, that they engrave an asterisk next to the word "Winner".

Redhead
It took a while for me to spit out all of the words you (and others) put in my mouth. I mentioned my solar panels because I wanted to cite an example of environmentalists not being hypocritical about embracing solar energy. Good for you on your tree covered home. If you can avoid air conditioning, that likely pencils out to be just as productive as a photovoltaic system.

I'm also glad that you're into recycling. Liberals got into that 30 years ago (and took a lot of heat for it). I'll check back in 30 years to see what you think about GW.

What's your basis for claiming that more people die from cold than heat? WHO estimates a net of 77,000 deaths/year from the causes of GW.

Your last post completed the conservative position on GW. GW isn't happening. It is happening but it's not caused by humans. And conservatives are doing a better job at fighting it than liberals.

global warming & hot air
This issue has been controversial from the beginning. Years ago when Al Gore won accolades for his book & more recently his movie, there were voices countering his doom & gloom spin. The alarmists, however seemed to attain the upper hand in the media and elsewhere. Much of what they preached has now been accepted as gospel in many circles. However, now, and increasingly of late, there are many coming out and countering this doomsday forecast. The amazing thing to me is that while spreading this propaganda it never occured to them that eventually the real inconvenient truth would come out. Did they really believe they could just pull the wool over our eyes and get away with lies of this magnitude? The attitudes of the enviromental alarmists represents either boundless audacity and arrogance, or incredible gullibility.

Help! I'm out of Salt!

Actually, the whole Detroit area is now rationing road salt. I went to 3 stores today and couldn't find so much as box of Morton.

Shovels you ask... Most stores are sold out! Snowblowers... Gone!

Average snowfall = 30-40 inches

This winter = 60+ inches

And I don't see Al Gore running his mouth? Where is he, The Bahamas?

Whither the record highs?
Anyone remember when the weather report used to mention the record high and low for the given date each night? Notice that for almost ten years on the national news channels that seems to have vanished? Wonder why? Because somebody was charting the real record highs and noted that MOST of them occurred BEFORE WW2!! Long before SUVs and carbon footprints. Oops! That's an inconvenient TRUTH for Algore the Bore.

-Ray

ModMark
I had not heard of the Stirling systems. They sound interesting. I'd heard oil/parabolic trough systems. I hear their more cost effective than PVs. I would love to start seeing those systems in parking lots.

That's what's sad about this debate. The doom and gloom really comes from the right. Meanwhile there are companies salivating over the prospect of green color jobs, and we can finally really do something about energy independence and cutting our trade deficit. But we still have the coal/oil crowd dragging us back like an anchor.

Now THAT'S a hoot! You don't NEED to

actually SEE the sun in order to be gathering solar power..

This is truly a big problem... people spouting off when they don't know what they're talking about.....





Cam
I didn’t put any words in your mouth, and I’m not responsible for your foot, either. You have stated on this thread and others that we should go along with GW because McCain, Bush, and Gore acknowledge it.

In 30 years, I expect we’ll be firmly into a cooling cycle and it, too, will be our fault.

My basis for more people dying from cold:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7240463.stm
“But it also stresses that milder winters mean deaths during this time of year - which far outstrip heat-related mortality - will continue to decline.”

“Your last post completed the conservative position on GW.”
Almost right, but I don’t think that conservatives are doing a better job at fighting it than liberals. Because there is nothing to fight.

Higene
I'm just curious where do you get your data about mankind producing over twice as much green house gases as the plants on earth can absorb? Just curious when you consider that the pyroclastic eruption of Mount St. Helens produced more hydrocarbon pollution than all of mankind put together. Trillions of tons of carbon, hydrocarbon and other chemicals were pumped into the atmosphere and fed into the ground water. Compared to that single even humanity are pikers when it comes to pollution.

Know something else very interesting. Human beings create CO2 (a green house gas) when they exhale. I know, let's have all the people terrified by Global Warming stop exhaling. That should take a few billion tons of hot CO2 out of the air.

Last but not least check the meteorological data, you'd see that 1998 was the peak and the years since 98 have been cooler and the temp is still going down. How long before you start screaming about an ice age.

Redhead writes: "In 30 years, I expect

we’ll be firmly into a cooling cycle and it, too, will be our fault."

OF COURSE! As long as we have a liberal awake and breathing, we will be at fault for anything they can use to take money from us and manipulate society...



ModMark
Of course we can adapt! Any changes will not be overnight unless we are hit by an asteroid or suffer a gigantic volcanic catastrophe. If either happens, I suggest kissing your rear goodbye, but I'm not going to make a movie about it.

In case you misssed it from my blog
This parody is based on Elton John's song DANIEL (original lyrics by Bernie Taupin)

Al Gore is traveling tonight on a plane
I can see his carbon footprints, oh but the man is insane
Oh and
I can see Al Gore waving goodbye
God it looks like Al Gore, with Oscar and the Nobel Prize

He says Earth is dying and I want to scream
Al says it's in the worst shape that he's ever seen
Oh and
How could he know, he's just a big dunce
Lord I hate Al Gore, and some voted for him once

Al Gore you wacko, what will your programs cost?
Do you still feel the pain from elections you lost?
You might have tried, but your ambitions died
Al Gore you've got stars
Standing there by your side

Al Gore you wacko, what will your programs cost?
Do you still feel the pain from elections you lost?
You might have tried, but your ambitions died
Al Gore you've got stars
Standing there by your side

Al Gore is traveling tonight on a plane
Leaving more carbon footprints, oh but the man is insane.
Oh and...
I can see Al Gore wearing a crown
God it looks like no one, understands he is a clown

God it looks like no one, understands he is a clown

It is truly amazing who quickly
we can resolve issues once we set our mind to it.

Now, who is going to find the solution to the tilt in the earth's axis when we all move South.

AGW alarmists
No one on this thread or participating in debate is saying alternative or (green) energy should not be developed and used, fresh air is a good thing, even conservatives enjoy breathing. The market will take care of incorporating alternative technologies, we do not need suppressive laws and taxes stifling the economy and redistributing wealth in the name of bunk science.

Honestly...
...did any rational person believe this global warming fantasy to begin with considering the sources?

After communism fell, the leftists had to find another way to destroy capitalism. Their propaganda machine had fallen apart worldwide so they went to the "green" movement. We would have to dismantle our production structures across the country to keep from dying, according to the leftist weather wizards. All they had to do is frighten some people and appeal to our homegrown socialists. It worked; Al Gore, Nobel prize and all.

I swear, if I read another article about this global warming BS, I'll upchuck.

you gotta ask why
For over thirty years, politicians have been saying we need to be energy independant, yet, we no closer than we were 30 years ago.

Illegal immigration has been a problem since Reagan was in office, our borders are more porous now than then, when 70% of the american population, in 2007, voiced their opinion on this issue they were ignored, so much for representation.

Now we have 'experts' telling us that AGW is 'real', although scientific evidence is very inconclusive, yet, drastic measures are already in the 'works'.

Every year we have more laws, regulations, and codes to deny the Individual his Inalienable rights, i.e. "life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness".

GloBULL Warming is just that! BULL!!!!

And algore and his warmies are about to be taken to the woodshed...

It's going to be great, I tell ya...

Long overdue... LOL



Thanks Mrs Paddy
Wonderful! I am a EJ fan, and could actually hear this one in my mind.

Just a small correction to an earlier post: scientific inquiry starts with a postulate, moves to a hypothesis (as experiments begin), then onto a theory (as results tend to confirm the hypothesis), and finally to a law (Which does not happen anymore. The most well-proved theory is not considered a law).

higene
*Oops, I forgot. Y’all expect to see the second coming of Christ our Lord and Savior long before the advent of unlivable temperatures here on Earth, and y’all will rise up to a nice cool paradise in heaven, and leave us naysayers to rot in the hell of our own making. Why do I keep forgetting that.*

Where the hell did THAT come from? This is part of your AGW argument? Yes, higene, we are all Jesus Freaks here. We even have a club called Jesus-Freaks for Destroying Earth. Would you like to infiltrate it?

BTW, as for greenhouse gases "trapping" heat from many sources, that's an oversimplified statement which I'm sure you'll look into further when you get back to your scientific research. And not all gg's are bad. No greenhouses gases, we would be the moon.

Gosh, you're funny.

Polar ice increasing REALLY!????

Can't find anything reports that points to a trend in increasing ice. Three entries below published in Jan 2008, are typical of reports on Arctic Sea Ice.

Arctic ice loss
Jan 23,2008 The Arctic ice cap has shrunk by an area twice the size of France's land mass over the last two years, the Paris-based National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) said Wednesday.

Arctic Ice loss
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/01/18/arctic-ice-melt.ht ml
January 18,2008 A new study using satellite measurements of Arctic sea ice have revealed that thinner ice that's only two or three years old now accounts for 58 percent of the ice cover -- up from 35 percent in the mid-1980s. Meanwhile, ice older than nine years had all but disappeared by 2007.The extinction of the older, thicker ice is effectively melting away the Arctic Ocean's hedge against complete summer meltdowns, say researchers.

Arctic ice cap shrinkage
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Arctic_ice-cap_loss_twice _the_size_of_France_research_999.html
Jan 23 The Arctic ice cap has shrunk by an area twice the size of France's land mass over the last two years, the Paris-based National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) said Wednesday

Antarctic now increase but loss of on western antarctic
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0110/p14s01-sten.html
growth in Antarctica's sea ice over the past two decades masks significant regional declines in the Bellingshausen and Amundsen Sea. These glaciers are losing ice to the sea faster than snow is replenishing the ice. Thus, the large regional drops in sea ice could also signal the presence of "a very big threat to glacier ice" on the continent, As melt occurs glaciers breakup and flow into the sea. says Xiaojun Yuan, a polar scientist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y.

Yes, Higene
Wikipedia is notorious for disinformation, from a congressman deleting a paragraph where he pledged to honor a term limits promise (he broke the promise)to false and malicious character assassination.

In short a scholar citing Wikipedia would be like a journalist quoting from the National Enquirer.

Yes, really
Not only is Antarctic ice reported to be increasing (see an example in my post yesterday at 11:51), but there are also reports of Arctic ice increasing.

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/icing-the-hype/so_it_appears_ that_arctic_ice_isnt_vanishing_after_all/

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate/recent_cold _snap_helping_arctic_sea_ice_scientists_find/

ICECAP stands for International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project. Check out some of their experts (alarmist alert - more real scientists) at http://icecap.us/index.php/go/experts

For the Foundation (1 Cor. 3:11) of the Founders ><>

higene
Nope, wasn't wondering about any interview on any show. I watch little of TV and generally consider it a waste of time. But I do observe the broad sweeps of judgement you heap on everyone here as far as Jesus, the Second Coming, the hereafter, etc., and whatever else you have stored against them in that head of yours.

When you speak of self-centeredness and self-righteousness it is not religious folk that come to mind.

Believe, Higene!

NASA????
If the ice is increasing with a report from NASA it would logically be all over the web. Its just not here. Where did the author get his informations

Type in NASA Arctic ice and here what comes up.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22203980/ Dec. 11, 2007
This week, after reviewing his own new data, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally warned that "at this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions."

Maybe this one is the source from News busters. Climate change is about changing weather patterns including winds.
"As such, it certainly was no surprise when NASA released a report Monday claiming "the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds," virtually no media outlets shared the information with the citizenry, and those that did still blamed the melting ice on - you guessed it - global warming.?

Most reports come from NSIDC the National Snow and Ice Data center.
Here is there Oct 2007 Press Release, Arctic Sea Ice Shatters All Previous Record Lows



Or how about this theory
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/05mar_arctic.htm
Global warming could plunge North America and Western Europe into a deep freeze, possibly within only a few decades.That's the paradoxical scenario gaining credibility among many climate scientists. The thawing of sea ice covering the Arctic could disturb or even halt large currents in the Atlantic Ocean. Without the vast heat that these ocean currents deliver--comparable to the power generation of a million nuclear power plants--Europe's average temperature would likely drop 5 to 10°C (9 to 18°F), and parts of eastern North America would be chilled somewhat less. Such a dip in temperature would be similar to global average temperatures toward the end of the last ice age roughly 20,000 years ago.

This idea has been kicking around quite some time. The Gulf stream depends on Cold Icy water sinking near Greenland. With glacier melt water that is fresh the Salty water is diluted and fails to sink. Take your pick, Ice Age or tropical we are changing things. And in spite of the cavalier attitudes, economies and people will suffer.

How about these?
From ICECAP's FAQs and Myths page:
"Glaciers all over the world are shrinking because of global warming.
Actually, this is somewhat true, but it is unlikely that changes in glaciers are affected by recent climate changes. According to the Glacier Program at Rice University (http://www.glacier.rice.edu), the response time to climate changes for different sizes of glaciers are as follows:
· ice sheet: 100,000 to 10,000 years
· large valley glacier: 10,000 to 1,000 years
· small valley glacier: 1,000 to 100 years

For very large glaciers such as the Antarctic Ice Sheet, considerable time is needed for the ice sheet to respond to any environmental changes. Changes in climate may take tens of thousands of years before the entire ice sheet has adjusted to changing, and by that time, the climate may have changed again.
Ref: http://icecap.us/index.php/go/faqs-and-myths#10

The newly released NIPCC report, Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate, "shows conclusively that the human greenhouse gas contribution to current warming is insignificant" and "Empirical evidence suggests very strongly that the main cause of warming and cooling on a decadal scale derives from solar activity..."
Ref: http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC-Feb%2020.pdf

Obviously, there is not a "consensus" that people and their machines are the primary culprits for slight rises in temperature. That big, bright, hot star up there has more to do with this than we do. As others have written, there's not much Al Gore can do about the Sun.

For the Foundation (1 Cor. 3:11) of the Founders ><>

ICECAP
Sorry jeff but I am a skeptic. The ICECAP website states that it is privately funded. Rummaging around through their files finds the Heartland Institute is deeply involved with ICECAP. My initial try at trying to find the funders of ICECAP hasn't revealed much otherwise. But the Heart land Institute which appears connected with ICECAP is funded by the Cato Institute which receives much of its funding from EXXON and a number of other oil Companies. It is very well known for challenging climate change. Even the ice graph that was posted on the ICECAP article about Arctic ice showing the winter summer melt is crazy. It is an even line with the ups and downs every year the same. Any of the National Snow and Ice Data center data as well as international research shows the seasonal ups and down of ice cover but there is a steady average decline.

Follow the money and look at the source of the information. There has been a continuing campaign by Exxon funded sources to "question the science of climate change and a deliberate effort to put out misleading information about it. You have to read both sides, have a understanding of how research is conducted and review the information then draw your own opinions.
Personally I don't trust much of any climate change data put out with oil company funding.

"In conclusion,
this NIPCC report falsifies the principal IPCC conclusion that the reported warming (since 1979) is very likely caused by the human emission of greenhouse gases.”

What could possibly have caused Dr. Singer and associates to arrive at this conclusion? Here are excerpts from page 4 of the report:

Figure 4a: The global mean surface temperature (GMST) of the twentieth century. Note the cooling between 1940 and 1975. [NASA-GISS, http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/]. GMST is subject to uncertain corrections; see text for a discussion of the problems of land and ocean data. The recent rise in temperatures shown here is suspect and does not agree with the measured tropospheric temperature trend (see Figure 13) or with the better-controlled US data, shown in Figure 4b.

Figure 4b: The 2007 discovery of an error in the handling of U.S. data has led to a greater amplitude of pre-1940 warming, which now exceeds the 1998 peak. The Arctic data exhibit a higher temperature in the 1930s than at present and correlate well with values of solar irradiance [Soon 2005]. Note the absence of recent warming and of any post-1998 temperature trend.

Did you catch that? “The Arctic data exhibit a higher temperature in the 1930s than at present…”

From page 8: “An error in the analysis of the NASA-GISS surface data for the U.S. was discovered recently by Stephen McIntyre [2007]. As a result, the year 1934 has emerged as the warmest of the twentieth century for the U.S., and the 1930s the warmest decade.”

The error was reported to NASA last August (e.g., see http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934 -and-all-that/), and NASA made adjustments, but it hasn’t been as widely reported as stories about melting ice. Hmmm.

Ice melts. Water freezes. Cycles are involved here, and human activities are farther down the list than some would have you believe.

For the Foundation (1 Cor. 3:11) of the Founders ><>

We will soon know who is correct
The scientists I follow say the warming is going faster than expected. We will soon know if warming is actually occurring or not. This year is a La nina year that is about a 7 year cycle and brings cooler and wetter weather than usual. It is predicted to be ebbing during these spring months. If we remain cooler or hotter remains to be seen and what the next decade brings will be critical. If the climate change folks are right and we do nothing. Its going to be tough going for us.

Warming where? How much?
Some places get warmer, some get colder. Some climatologists can't predict accurately what is going to happen tomorrow, some can.

Which should we follow, the science or the money, or neither, or both? Why? Science is only as good as the instruments being used for measurements, the honesty of people using them and analyzing measured data for or against an associated theory, the repeatability of the measurements, and the validity of the theory with respect to the data. Money is only as good as the standard(s) on which it rests, the honesty of the people using it and the goods and services involved, stability in governments (due to people), and the validity in the markets with respect to value. One common component: people. Honesty, expertise, validity, and values may vary.

There are bigger problems facing us than climate cycles, but there are some (e.g., Algore) who want to control policies and, by extension, your life. Did you hear/read about the proposed remote-control thermostats? Why do you suppose they say, “the debate is over,” and have tried to discredit some (including some experts) who disagree? Honesty, expertise, validity, and values may vary.

For the Foundation (1 Cor. 3:11) of the Founders ><>

Jeff
I've got work to do but I can't leave this yet.
As to "the cooling between 1940 and 1970". Yes it did cool in those years. Recall the discussion and worry about ice age returning during that period. But if you follow the graphs into the 90's thats when the warming began to be expressed and really took off after 2000. Its all right there on the graphs.

You can track the La Nina starting on the graphs in late 2007 and into 2008. You can also track the volcanic eruptions that spewed so much particulate matter into the air that it brought about a bit of temporary cooling.

The stratosphere was a puzzle, the instruments said it was cooling when models noted it should be heating. A malfunction that was discovered in the instrument corrected and found it was indeed warming. There were several news releases that went out when that happened.

There is no doubt there are errors and difficulties in getting a handle on something as complex as climate and changing weather patterns.

I can't locate your 4b table which seems key to your arguments. I have to get busy preparing to teach a climate change class.

Thanks for your comments. Discussion is good.

chicaree
"Take your pick, Ice Age or tropical we are changing things. And in spite of the cavalier attitudes, economies and people will suffer."

"Sorry jeff but I am a skeptic."

No you're not. You're a shill.

Chicaree
Both figures/tables are on page 4 of the main body (page 14 of 50 in the pdf):
http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC-Feb%2020.pdf

Effects are one thing. Causes are another.

Thank you.

For the Foundation (1 Cor. 3:11) of the Founders ><>

inthemajority
still laughing my a$$ off at your posts today.

How is Uncle Darwin, by the way?

Any predictions for us today? How many Category 5 hurricanes should we prepare for on the Gulf Coast this summer? When will this dang winter end?

be a sport, IMT. Predict some more GW for us!

Global Warming and Gore
Could it be that it is very hard to Google anything about the Global Cooling, is that Gore is a "senior advisor" to Google. The manmade Global warming hoax is at the root of our current economic problems, and lack of sane energy policy. We're buring food for ethanol, dramatically raising the cost at the grocery store. Drilling our own petroleum resources has been blocked in the name of Global Warming. It's bringing our economy to it's knees. There's a special place in hell for these scammers!

0000
**There's a special place in hell for these scammers!**

Amen, brother!

As for Googling. It was Googling that brought me to the conclusion that something was fishy about the one-sided, repetitious story of AGW--the belief that it was man's fault and we should be ashamed and are doomed, blah blah blah, etc...because I had to scroll through hundreds of hits to get ONE contrary view. The first hit was actually a fairly balanced assessment at a NASA site and the second the always interesting and contrary Reference Frame blog(now a favorite).


Cool News About Global Warming
Somebody tell John McCain about this too.

Darn Right, It's Cold ...
I live in SoCal, south of LA, and I've used my heater SIX TIMES this winter! And sock, too. Plenty of socks. Just in case this global cooling thing gets out of hand, I still have my goose down parka and insulated hunting boots ... somewhere.

Gore is one lucky buffoon. He's making more money as manbearpig than he could have as a President, plus Hollywood and the Eurocracy slobbered all over him. Now, maybe he'll slip off in his JetStream to a warm island and vanish.

Chicaree - follow the money
What are you talking about in follow the money. Tell me where there is money for a scientist to be a sceptic. I hear about all this secret funding from oil companies. What utter nonsense. The real money here is coming from governments. All the government money (and there are tons of it) is in looking at the impact of global warming.

I use the same logic as those who reject studies from researchers with alleged ties to oil companies. That is, if a study comes from a researcher who has been paid by a government promting GW, I must reject it as biased and flawed.

Where is the money in challenging this GW nonsense. These gullible gooses that believe in GW need to understand what this is about - control.

The Science Behind GW Is Not Science ...
Just academics and graduate students trying to get funding and to make jobs or consulting contracts for themselves. It began as a failed attempt to push the nuclear industry that snowballed (pun half intended) out of control.

I will fight the mandates with my last breath.

Scientist Against AGW
From the obituary of Frederick Seitz, the theoretical physicist . . .and former president of the National Academy of Sciences.. . .

"In 1984, he co-founded the conservative George C. Marshall Institute in Washington with William Nierenberg and Robert Jastrow. From that bully pulpit, he spoke often and vigorously against the idea that global warming was caused by humans, savaging a 1995 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that argued the point.

In 1998, he urged fellow scientists to sign a petition backed by an Oregon group opposed to U.S. ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to limit emissions of greenhouse gases.”

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-seitz7mar07,0, 6965374.story

Dr. Seitz was one incredibly smart man. I suspect he knew a thing or two about the AGW subject. I love the phrase, "savaging a 1995 report by IPCC."

What say you, inthemajority?

Al Gore's money
Higene writes: Wednesday, March, 05, 2008 2:00 AM
BTW, the 'fair and balanced' interviewer observed rather snidely that Al probably doesn't care what he's charged with because he made all his money inventing the internet.
---------
Actually, Al Gore made all his money from both inheriting blood money from his father (received for exploiting the genocidal murder and liquidation of the assets of the Kulaks and a few other ethnics Russian peasants) and acting as the further supplicant of Armand Hammer (who regularly claimed that he OWNED both the Gore Senators).

Cool News about Global warming
With all the new information coming out lately
confirming what a scam man-made global warming
is, how can any Conservative in his or her right
mind vote for a lie? No wonder "Carbon Cap"
McCain hates free speech so much. Hell will freeze over before I vote for him.

Incredibly smart man
Seitz was very smart, but also smart enough to make science into politics for his own gain. There are more credentialed/smart scientists named Steve who cannot believe there are 20 (30?) scientists around the world with the hoax that GW is a hoax.

"... and authoring a paper which said that global warming and ozone depletion were exaggerated threats devised by environmentalists and unscrupulous scientists pushing a political agenda. In that same paper, Seitz asserted that secondhand smoke posed no real health risks, an opinion he repeats in our interview. "I just can't believe it's that bad," he says."

I just can't believe some so-called smart guy was still be backing RJR with crap reports on crap science on something RJR had admitted was a well-funded scam.

So yes, there are some very smart people that need to be heard. It's just that it is so hard to hear them over the overwhelming majority who say otherwise.

Smart Guy
Like this one?

Gerard Bond et al., “A Pervasive Millennial-Scale Cycle in North Atlantic Holocene and Glacial Climates,” Science, vol. 278, no. 5341, November 14, 1997, pages 1257–1266.

There, Bond states he found "a series of climatic shifts with a cyclicity close to 1,470 years (plus or minus 500 years)."

Majoritarianism in science is patently absurd. Observing the facts, and constructing consistent theories is the hallmark of a real scientist.

energyguy
"Majoritarianism in science is patently absurd. Observing the facts, and constructing consistent theories is the hallmark of a real scientist."

Yes! Now you get it! Now if we could get the people who find one scientist to fit their political view to understand this, especially when positioned (against the vast majority of fact observing scientists, then we can get somewhere.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.