Snow means global warming is a myth!

[MongGrel]

Because god forbid an movement like the Tea Party should ever fight to uphold our Constitution, fight for smaller government, or lower taxes. That would be terrible. But keep living in your trumped up media driven Liberal fantasy world.

Edit: For the record I believe there are more reported of cases of voter tampering on the liberal side of the aisle.

N00b.

 

[Pens1566]

Republican links snow to climate change: IDIOT!

Democrat links hurricanes to climate change: That's just good science.

Democrats, LOL.

DERP

 

[master_shake_]

thought it was climate change?

 

[nickqt]

DERP

Just let him get his LOL Democrats™ out now and again. Especially if he is able to do so without yelling, screaming, cursing and drooling everywhere.

 

[werepossum]

All right thinking people know that only the politicians can save the planet.
Even the president has said that the science is settled.

Why won't you give the politicians more money?

Look at the politician's success in the War on Poverty.
Look at the politician's success in the War on Drugs.

Why wouldn't a war on Global Warming be equally as successful?

Uno

lol +1

Republican links snow to climate change: IDIOT!

Democrat links hurricanes to climate change: That's just good science.

Democrats, LOL.

Well - in their defense, Democrats link literally everything to climate change. Warmer, colder, wetter, dryer, more hurricanes or fewer, literally everything is caused by catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. Um, climate change. And if you don't agree that climate began with the Industrial Age, you're a climate denier.

 

[Paratus]

lol +1


Well - in their defense, Democrats link literally everything to climate change. Warmer, colder, wetter, dryer, more hurricanes or fewer, literally everything is caused by catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. Um, climate change. And if you don't agree that climate began with the Industrial Age, you're a climate denier.

I'll repost this from the other thread:


Well a new study that was just released in Nature and summarized by Ars details 12 years of direct measurments measurements of the effect of CO2 on heat retention in the atmosphere.

They found over 12 years that thermal retention increased by .2W/m^2. So the effects of increased CO2 are actually increasing.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/02/newsflash-the-greenhouse-effect-really-exists/
.....The new work, done by a US-based team, used instruments funded by the Department of Energy. Located in Alaska and the southern Great Plains, the instruments look straight up into the sky and measures the spectrum of infrared light it receives, revealing the presence of various molecules in the atmosphere, such as water vapor, ozone, carbon dioxide, and methane.

The spectrum it sees looks very much like the one we'd calculated it should see, with a few exceptions caused by heating of the instrument itself. But the precise details vary based on the factors noted above, like the weather and seasons. Using a decade-long time series, the authors are able to get all these other factors to effectively cancel out; what emerges shows "the unmistakable spectral fingerprint of CO2."

And not just CO2, but rising CO2. Over the deade the authors examined (2000 to 2010), the average level of the gas in the atmosphere went up by 22 parts-per-million. And the time series shows a steadily rising trend in its impact, layered on top of the seasonal changes. By the end of that period, the gas was retaining an extra 0.2 Watts for every square meter of the Earth's surface compared to the start.

Given longer periods of time, these measurements should allow us to confirm some of the basic features of the greenhouse effect. But they won't provide a complete picture of climate change, as they have to be done under clear-sky conditions; clouds play an important and somewhat uncertain role in both insulating and cooling the planet.

Still, it seems worth noting that the continued increase in greenhouse energy retention measured during this time coincides with a period where the Earth's surface temperatures did not change dramatically. All that energy must have been going somewhere.

Nature, 2014. DOI: 10.1038/nature14240 (About DOIs).

Of course we do know where the energy that isn't in the atmosphere is going. It's going where we measured it, in the ocean.

Sometimes you have to accept new information even if it contradicts what you want to believe.

 

[Matt1970]

^^^ According to that graph we should have known that 20 years ago, yet it is just now coming to light?

 

[Jaskalas]

the gas was retaining an extra 0.2 Watts for every square meter

Looks like a fairly direct measurement. What does 0.2 Watts per square meter translate into?

The observational data would help back up any models on climate sensitivity that agreed. Then we can reasonably assume to follow the model for impacts.
We're talking cornering the guess work and turning it into real science.

 

[dank69]

^^^ According to that graph we should have known that 20 years ago, yet it is just now coming to light?

Even as it is today it still isn't enough to convince you or any other climate denier. Why would it have been enough back then?

 

[Subyman]

Republican links snow to climate change: IDIOT!

Democrat links hurricanes to climate change: That's just good science.

Democrats, LOL.

How about you don't get your scientific insight from either party? All the scientific reports and data are readily available.

 

[cubby1223]

Or at least according to James Inhofe it does

I give you the chair of the Senate's Environment and Public Works committee.


Yes ... because February is not a time of year you would expect snow in D.C....


We are so screwed as a nation with idiots like this in charge.

Why not?

According to global warming alarmists in the media, lack of snow is definitive proof global warming is real. Thus an over-abundance of snow does count as evidence too.

 

[MagickMan]

I love how some people take infographics, that anyone can make in a matter of minutes, and use them as some sort of proof. :\

 

[Jaskalas]

They found over 12 years that thermal retention increased by .2W/m^2. So the effects of increased CO2 are actually increasing.

http://www.easterbrook.ca/
Hansen et. al. give an estimate of the energy imbalance of 0.58 ± 0.15 W/m2 for the period from 2005-2010.

So the "experts" estimated near 0.6 W/m2 for a 5 year period. When the reality is a third of that in a 12 year period. I imagine that puts a damper on their foretelling of doom.

So long as I'm interpreting these numbers correctly, to pair them with the observations means that when they predict 3c of warming, we should expect much less than 1c.

 

[boomerang]

Hey, could you guys get back on track in the spirit of the thread? You know, R's bad, D's good? Can't get enough of those.

 

[cubby1223]

Sometimes you have to accept new information even if it contradicts what you want to believe.

So what did humans do in the 60's that caused so much cooling? And then we repeat that.

 

[Matt1970]

Even as it is today it still isn't enough to convince you or any other climate denier. Why would it have been enough back then?

Because if that is what the evidence is pointing at, that should have been brought to light back then. Now it just seems more like a fallback scenario.

 

[Blue_Max]

Mark my words, Global Poisoning will kill us long before the climate will. It was talked about during the Soylent Green era and through the 80's... then people stopped giving a shit as the problems just kept getting worse with no solutions in sight.

 

[thraashman]

Hey, could you guys get back on track in the spirit of the thread? You know, R's bad, D's good? Can't get enough of those.

Actually, seeing as I created the thread, you may notice that I didn't call out one specific party. I only called out the specific idiot that said something remarkably stupid. It sounds like you might be recognizing that the party that one idiot belongs to has a history of this type of idiotic behavior, but I never made such a generalization. It is nice to see you're noticing the stupidity with which you've aligned your beliefs, even if that hasn't yet changed them.

 

[sportage]

We all know global warming does not mean hot or warm or less cold.
Global warming simply stands for drastic and dramatic climate change world wide.
Tornadoes, snow, floods, droughts, seasons out of whack, etc etc.
All of that could possibly be summed up as normal climate occurrence.
But the climate change part comes in where the trend is not some occasional fluke.
Climate comes into play when the trend is ongoing and continues long term.

100 year floods, year after year.
Rivers that disappear.
Tornadoes and hurricane breaking records for both rate of occurrence and intensity.

In short, all hell breaking out year after year.
THAT is global warming i.e. climate change.
It could be man made, but who really wants to wait to find out?
Just go ahead and clean up the environment and regulate polluters. Spend the money.
If it all boils down to cleaner lakes and rivers, and a healthier glass of drinking water, it will be worth the effort, and the price.
You don't necessarily need a tornado to wipe your entire town off the map.
Ensuring your kid fresh air to breath and clean water to drink should be more than enough.

 

[MetalMat]

I DONT understand why people think this is a myth! Are you convincing yourself it Is just to make you feel better? Look I work in the oil and gas industry and I believe 100% that this is real because I believe in science.

 

[Captante]

I DONT understand why people think this is a myth! Are you convincing yourself it Is just to make you feel better? Look I work in the oil and gas industry and I believe 100% that this is real because I believe in science.

Sadly the majority of people are idiots & a fair percentage of the none-idiot's have something to gain by convincing said majority its a myth.

 

[IGBT]

the eco-KOOKS will spin / twist / turn / lie and use alarmist rhetoric to explain away all unseasonable weather as the sky is falling. Keep in mind this is largely the same bunch of alarmist KOOKS that gave us Y2K.

 

[rudeguy]

Dear Dummy,

When we said "Global Warming" we didn't mean that the entire world would never experience another winter.

Sincerely,

Al Gore

But you did say the polar ice caps would be melted by now.

Do away with hyperbole, fear mongering, politicians getting rich off the theory, scientists fudging numbers and we can have an honest discussion about global climate warming change. Until then, its just more rhetoric that no one is going to take seriously.

 

[Lash444]

But you did say the polar ice caps would be melted by now.

Do away with hyperbole, fear mongering, politicians getting rich off the theory, scientists fudging numbers and we can have an honest discussion about global climate warming change. Until then, its just more rhetoric that no one is going to take seriously.

I can't even hardly respond to this.

Yeah, the entire scientific community has come to an overwhelming conclusion (and make no mistake about it, they have) that humans are having an effect on climate change, and yet you can just flat out dismiss it.

And how do you dismiss it? Through research? Facts?

No. Its because they are all corrupt. All on the take. And you expect people to have a "honest discussion" with you? Yeah man, that is what is going to happen. People want to sit and argue with you about the merits of climate change, but instead by sidetracked by your Man-hasn't-been-to-the-moonesque tangents.

My grandma lived to 100 and smoked every day since she was 13. Cigarettes aren't bad for you, the government just wants to keep raising taxes exponentially on our personal freedoms. Do away with hyperbole, fear mongering, politicians getting rich off the theory, scientists fudging numbers and we can have an honest discussion about cigarettes killing people.

See how stupid that shit sounds?

 

[WHAMPOM]

So what did humans do in the 60's that caused so much cooling? And then we repeat that.

Air pollution. Plus a little rebound from the dust bowl days.