On Fox News this morning there was a piece on a global warming rally that got snowed out. I only caught part of it but it showed a bunch of tents sitting in the snow. But then who knows maybe it was hot snow!!!!! IMO it seems that the GW loons need to give up and admit that there hasnt be any significant warming for 18 year now. They also need to admit their dire warning have NOT come true. Gore for instance said several years ago that by now there would be no Arctic ice. Other know it all GWers said that after Katrina, we should expect 2 or 3 Katrinas a year. That hasnt happened either, in fact after Katrina there has been pretty much a lull in huricanes. It pretty much seems that Mother Nature is not co-operating with the global warming loons. Pardon me if I snicker at their foolishness.
Their biggest problem is that they go around saying this and that are facts, "IT IS SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN" then when it turns out they were wrong it makes them look like a laughing stock. Had they taken a more balanced, low key approach then maybe they could have had some more credibility. Now no one believes them on anything.
Cooling is a consequence of global warming. Warming is a consequence of global warming. Stable temperatures are a consequence of global warming. More hurricanes and more tornadoes are a consequence of global warming. Fewer hurricanes and fewer tornadoes are a consequence of global warming. Truly, global warming is one hell of a theory, beings how anything and everything proves the theory and anything and everything is explained by the theory. The major problem with that sort of circular reasoning nonsense is that it just isn't very good science. A theory that explains everything is a theory that explains nothing. A theory that is affirmed by everything is a theory that is affirmed by nothing. One could make the same argument for the proof of existence of God and that is what the AGW has made their theory. Behold, the new, better God and it is good science because we say it is. This is good science; a scientists designs a hypothesis which is tested by a repeatable experiment. For example, Hurricane Katrina was caused by AGW and therefore Hurricane Katrinas will happen more often. Then they test this hypothesis, which in this case involves simply sitting around and waiting a few years for the next Hurricane Katrina. The hypothesis is either proven or, and this is the most important part, disproven and discarded. The problem with the bad science of AGW is that the failures of predictions aren't discarded. The Acolytes at the Church of Global Warming simply dream up some far fetched explanation as to why their theory was correct after all even if it failed the test of the hypothesis. That isn't science, its religion.
Global warming causes distress in the lower tract, when you drink the tainted cool aid poured out by the so called "climate scientist". The more they protest, and try to cover up their mistakes the more foolish they look. Who belives the little climate scientist that yelled wolf 14875 times??????
Oh great, another 'it's snowing therefore that's evidence of no global warming' thread - - - Updated - - - No, so sayeth someone who hasn't a clue about the subject...
Thousands of Sick Sea Lion Pups Are Washing Up Along the California Coast A warmer Pacific Ocean might sound like a dream if you're planning a summer vacation along the California coast. But for sea lions it's turning out to be a nightmare. Hot ocean temperatures are disrupting the food chain, leading thousands of hungry sea lion pups to wash ashore hungry and dehydrated. Sea lion strandings have been high since 2013, when more than 1,100 of them came ashore. Almost 2,500 have washed ashore this year, mostly on southern California beaches from Santa Barbara in the north to San Diego in the south, according to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Read more at the link above.
Astoria Oregon is having a record number of sea lions ad it is becoming a huge problem. https://foursquare.com/v/sea-lion-dock/4e5c4f0e62e1ef715a4b95dd Some say there are as many as 3,200 on the docks. It is the greatest number of sea lions anyone has ever seen. So what? Does a lack of sea lions and a glut of sea lions mean global warming? Why not? I hear there is a squirrel infestation in Dun Geep, Idaho. That is probably evidence of global warming as well.
I realize for the entrenched cult of denial there is no evidence that will convince them, but sooner or later its impacts will affect you, and THAT is what we need to be concerned about now. We are at or beyond the tipping point. You guys have won. Now it's a matter of just dealing with it, and unfortunately for many of you, you are still behind the curve ball. When the effects of climate change hit you personally, I wish there was a way of reminding you of your willful ignorance...but we'll just have to wait to see how that plays out. Please keep in mind, this is not some apocalyptic wish, this is doing what the planet has done when it is messed with. We now have to be more prudent to our next steps, because the earth will continue to revolve around the sun, regardless of whether or not we are here.
How do you or anyone else know we are past a tipping point? It all comes from blind faith in computer models. These same computer models had us worried about man made global cooling in 1976. These same computer models had the 11th Street Bridge in New York City under water by the year 2000. None, absolutely none of the computer models predicted an 18 year and four month hiatus in global warming. The computer models have next to zero predictive validity. They haven't worked in the past, they aren't working now, and they may never work. Yet the acolytes who worship at the Church of Anthropogenic Global Climate Change cling to them like the Amish cling to Bibles. Why? Because you have faith. I can respect that. But can you at least admit that the computer modelling of the climate has been terrible in terms of predictions. I work in a field in which we deal with flooding and the mean sea level. Do you know how we determine mean sea level? We measure it. We don't use computer modelling because we, as a profession, are infinitely more honest than climate scientists. Computer modelling cannot be used for something as simple as mean sea levels. We recognize the limits of using formulas for prediction, Yet climatologists are willing to pronounce without hesitation climate predictions, knowing that climate is a system that is infinitely more complex than simply predicting the sea level. Of course, everything I say will be heresy to you. There isn't a chance in the world that you will ever believe that I may have a better and more comprehensive science background than you or your clergy. That's okay with me. Believe what you will.
And the problem with the computer models is the fact they are programed by "climate scientist" with an agenda, so the computer predictions are flawed. Garbage in garbage out!!!!!!
Only in modern climate science is it that the data is adjusted to fit the model rather than the other way around, I read the NOAA report odds on favorite right now is a weak el Nino. However combine that with the report from Oregon and the greater likelihood is that natures natural boom and bust cycle is happening because no one is clubbing seals anymore and the depletion of sharks, especially large shark species means that the natural predators of sea lions aren't controlling their populations any more.
"SEEING IS BELIEVING" http://www.ted.com/talks/james_balog_time_lapse_proof_of_extreme_ice_loss?language=en
And everyone that is shrinking is doing so for different reasons Kilamanjaro is shrinking because the forest at it's base that used to feed it moisture through transpiration are also largely gone. warming has nothing to do with it. Vulcanism especially in Iceland is reducing others. California's are receding after two years or so of drought. Pleas note California has experienced drought periodically since the end of the last Ice age.
It is the result of global warming. The severe winter storms are a mediate consequence of the slowdown of thermohaline circulation (e.g., the Gulf Stream that runs up the eastern coast) caused by warming ocean temperature and decreased salinity due to melting shelf ice flows from the arctic. It only takes a small rise in ocean temperature to result in catastrophic meteorological events; and we can expect to see more and more severe weather patterns in the future.
So you folks haven't sufficently shown your ignorance for a while and thought you would trot it out for a show? Ok, I'll play. Did you get snow in 2014? It was by measurement the warmest year in recorded history. Let's say that again, measured. Not projected, not guessed, not debated, measured. Out of 14 years this millennia, 9 rank among the warmest 10 years man has seen since records started being kept of explorers first sailing to the New World. Now you are free to ignore historical records, the accumulated science of mankind, and even the very air you breath. But you are arguing with a thermometer. We easily measure temperatures to 1/1000th of a degree every day. Speculate all you want on why all you want but there is no doubt the event is occurring. If you want to know about the mechanics, they are straight forward, predictable, and easily demonstrated. But ignoring all of the why or how, the very simple fact is we measure the temperature. If you want to know where the next lame thread will come from consider while you people up north have been shivering in 2015, we have had unseasonably warm weather down here since February and spent the last couple of weeks in a Summer weather pattern that 2 months early. My guess is that 2015 will also rank among the warmest in history, your snow storm not withstanding.
So let me see if I have this correct, because you work in a "field" that measures sea levels in the state of Oregon I am supposed to bow to your expertise? I work in the insurance field. Your claim would be the equivalent of me giving you advice regarding earthquake or flood insurance, but for me to do so would be unethical, immoral, and illegal because my specialty is health insurance. The only thing I'll be qualified to do is explain in general the principles of insurance. I can't say firsthand whether or not we are at the tipping point or beyond it, however the vast majority of scientists who specifically study climatology, oceanography, and its ancillary disciplines seem to be in general agreement. So yes, I will go with what the majority says because that is how science works. This is no different than if you had been diagnosed with a critical illness and you go see 10 doctors and eight of them agree. Are you seriously going to base what course of treatment to take based on the minority opinion? Not only is that illogical, it's downright foolish. Yet somehow the deniers will point to these scientists as having an "agenda" Never mind that we are talking about scientist from multiple institutions around the globe, we are supposed to distrust them because a handful of scientists who are on the payroll of some of the largest corporations keep plugging holes into their theory. I have seen all of this before. It is the same exact technique verbatim used by the tobacco industry back in the 60s, 70s and 80s to disprove the connection between cancer and cigarette smoking. The only difference being is that with smoking, the individual's denial would for the most part only affect him/her. With the issue of climate change the denial and obfuscation of a few affects the many. I don't deny your practical experience, but its scope sounds limited, unless you're going to tell me that you measure sea levels around the globe, and if that were the case then you, or your team, should have some research papers out there that you can link to. I am all for hearing an opposing view, but not from armchair "scientists" who are a dime a dozen on political forums.
Please, elaborate on what this "agenda" by climate scientists could possibly be. And I would also greatly appreciate your thoughts on what the Koch brothers agenda might be, since they are the principal backers behind most of the anti-climate change organizations out there.
It's called El Nino a normal cycle of the Pacific Ocean. By next year La Nina will be upon us. See: http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/faq.html#what
