with the global warming causes cold weather. magic global warming causes blizzard from that bastion of the truth the NY Times Feeling a Chill? Blame the Polar Vortex. And Global Warming. news flash. Polar vortex has been there a lot longer than the start of the industrial age
what does this have to do with the topic? scurry over to skeptical science and at least cut and paste something relevant to the polar vortex
Feeling a Chill? Blame the Polar Vortex. And Global Warming. try this, had the good old double http// but yes the NY Times maintaining that before 1900 there were never any temperature changes and the weather was a uniform 70- 75 degrees year round. No blizzards, no heat waves, no floods or droughts. Ahh yes it was utopia on Earth before the industrial age
Whenever and wherever it gets warm it's global warming on display but whenever and wherever it gets cold it's just "weather", move along folks nuthin to see here.
I'll save you all a great deal of time: The earth's climate changes all the time and has changed since there was a climate. Natural, not man made. You either deal with it or you die. No great mystery here.
since it seems your debating skills are limited to slinging insults welcome to my ignore list. If I want to play silly games I have Civ 6 and ESO, much more fun and challenging. If you can't at least go to skeptical science and find a paper that was written pro global warming trend for me to discredit then you are not worth my time Now back to the OP I wonder if the NY Times are aware of the great blizzards of 1888 and 1889 which make some of the modern day blizzard look like mild dustings of snow. Or the one in 1922 when a blizzard swept across the Mid-Atlantic region, dropping massive snow across Maryland, D.C., Virginia, and Pennsylvania. There was so much snow it caused D.C.'s Knickerbocker Theater roof to cave in, killing 98 people and injuring 133.
Wasn't the north pole supposed to be gone about 2 years ago? I'm pretty sure the world was supposed to end around the year 2000 too due to global famine. By the way, are you feeling better after declaring war on the US on election night?
It's pretty funny that you fail so epically and then cry like a baby. What is it with American right wingers and their tenuous grasp on science, source criticism and facts? Defunded schools? - - - Updated - - - I don't know what kind of trash you read. Why don't you source where you got that from?
Amazing that us ignorant science deniers know that "extreme" weather has been here for as long as the Earth has existed while the AGW zealots think that nothing that happened before they were born is relevant. George Washington had a heck of a time with the polar vortex back in the 1780's although they probably just called it a damn cold winter.Too bad Al Gore was not there to warn them of global warming was the real cause In January 1780, fighting in the Revolutionary War came to a standstill as Mother Nature transformed America into a frigid hell. For the only time in recorded history, all of the saltwater inlets, harbors and sounds of the Atlantic coastal plain, from North Carolina northeastward, froze over and remained closed to navigation for a period of a month or more. Sleighs, not boats, carried cords of firewood across New York Harbor from New Jersey to Manhattan. The upper Chesapeake Bay in Maryland and the York and James rivers in Virginia turned to ice. In Philadelphia, the daily high temperature topped the freezing mark only once during the month of January, prompting Timothy Matlack, the patriot who had inscribed the official copy of the Declaration of Independence, to complain that “the ink now freezes in my pen within five feet of the fire in my parlour, at 4 o’clock in the afternoon.” http://www.historynet.com/americas-worst-winter-ever.htm
I guess a state of war does still exist. Al Gore and the IPCC, and various groups since the 70's. Here's an embarrassment of riches: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/...ts-have-been-wrong-about-virtually-everything [video=youtube;sLmTX_e6Vf8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLmTX_e6Vf8[/video] EDIT** Oh by the way, you'll be glad to know we can afford schooling again now that we won't be protecting you anymore.
When did Al Gore become a scientist? Do you have actual studies that claim this or? I didn't think I would need to explain what a source is as well... Do I?
Oh well please link me to some of your studies professor. It's funny how the AGW Church devours their own to keep perpetuating the lies. Plus Gore is just standing up there parroting IPCC talking points. P.S. The Himalayas are still there too. There's a list a mile long that scientists, the IPCC and others have been getting wrong about AGW since the 70's. They need to start walking around in one of these: AGW has about as much to do with science as the Mayan Long Calendar.
I didn't makes claims about scientists predictions? You want me to post studies about nothing? https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=nothing&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 Here; https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=global+warming&btnG=&as_sdt=1,5&as_sdtp=
Did you know that Al gore was almost immediately rebuked after that speech by Dr. Maslowski himself? He said: Mr Gores speech also provoked criticism from leading members of the climate science community, who described the projection as aggressive. Professor Jim Overland, a leading oceanographer at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration immediately said: So, is your position here that because a politician and alarmist Al Gore got this completely wrong that, therefore AGW is not occurring???? Because you seem to be posting a link to an AL Gore video and implying that his words equate to what scientists think. If not please explain what your position actually is. btw ... when you say "There's a list a mile long that scientists, the IPCC and others have been getting wrong about AGW since the 70's." ... what you seem to mean is that the news and politicians have been getting it wrong. I agree. But, 'news and politicians' does not equal 'scientists' as I think you know.
please now teh Maya were responsible for a number of remarkable scientific achievements–in astronomy, agriculture, engineering and communications. AGW climate zealots have accomplished nothing other than lies and propaganda. Leaving countries energy grids in a costly shambles where their policies were enacted climate change is definitely occurring and would be occurring whether mankind is present or not, the anthropological contribution is the part in doubt. Until we can identify and quantify the factors that caused the major climate shifts that I referenced earlier in this thread we have no idea how much mankind is contributing to this shift
Well unfortunately for Dr. Maslowski, he was still wrong. We've been taking data from the arctic since what, 1980? The frickin internet didn't even exist as a mainstream tool until the late 90's. The "scientists" are providing their research to the IPCC and drafting a report. If the "science" is good, then you either have one hell of a translation problem, or someone is intentionally misrepresenting the science. I don't think any AGW predictions have come true, now that I think about it. Got any examples of IPCC reports from the 90's, or anything from the 70's and 80's that has actually come to pass?
Let's unpack this a bit and see if we can get some of the rhetoric out of it ... Here is what Dr. Maslowski actually wrote: Now what part of that do you feel is wrong? I'm not sure what you mean by these points ... how are they relevant to the topic being discussed? Why is 'scientists' in quotes here? Why is 'science' in quotes here? What exactly is an 'AGW prediction'? Perhaps you can link to a paper that makes one of these 'agw predictions' you are talking about so I can better understand this point. Because in my experience, scientists are a cautious lot. They tend to shy away from bold predictions. Instead they give 'degrees of certainty' and always leave some wiggle room. (see the Dr. Maslowski quote above for a prime example) But if there is a scientific paper which says "WORLD DOOMED!! I have irrefutable proof!" Let me know. I will help you mock it.
The point I am making is that predictions are being based on input. Is the input valid? I'm not talking about a particular study, I'm talking about the predictions supposedly based on that input. Here's the real problem I have with AGW: we are talking about measuring geologic processes that are measured in thousands, if not tens of thousands of years. The earth has been going through this cycle probably since it's creation, kind of like a sine wave of heating and cooling. All these things happened way before humanity was present. Not only is our sample size in years tiny compared to the time necessary to measure geologic events on a planetary time scale, our technology to even begin to understand and measure these events is still in it's infancy. You simply can't take data from the arctic over a period of 20 years and say "this is not normal, people are killing the planet". We still do not truly know the relationship between carbon and it's warming effect, or if the warming effect is what produces the carbon in the atmosphere.
There was once a lake where the sahara desert is. I wonder what caused that lake to dry up? Any leftists care to weigh in?
People regualry find megalodon shark teeth when digging in the area I live in. I doubt if they walked ashore
In the 70s they told us here in MA that (specifically Plymouth rock) would be underwater by the year 2000. Ummm.......its still there in the same spot. The boat ramps are also in same exact spot. I don't think Earth got the message about warming us into waterworld. I don't have gills yet, nor do I need them. They were factually wrong.
sea level rise during deglaciation periods of earths history are normal. When glacial Lake Agassiz in north-central North America overcame it's ice dam about 8500 years ago the sea rose about .5 to 2.0 meters according to evidence from the Mississippi and Rhine deltas.
