Al Gore claims global warming caused this week's historic blizzard

[red states rule]

Al Gore has popped his head out of his igloo to once again show what a babbling fool he haqs become

Yes, if you have been digging out from the recent snowstorm, you can blame global warming




By: Lynn R. Mitchell 02/03/11 6:05 PM

Listening to Al Gore explain that the current round of turbulent winter weather is really an off-shoot of global warming brings a grin to the faces of many while others just shake their heads in disbelief.

Consisting of ice, record snow fall, bitter temperatures, and blizzard conditions of historic proportions, one-third of America was affected this week in a 2,000-mile swath of Old Man Winter's fury as frigid and deadly conditions stretched south into Mexico and north to Maine. How could global warming be real with all this winter weather?

Fox News reported that Gore had an explanation:

"As it turns out, the scientific community has been addressing this particular question for some time now, and they say increased heavy snowfalls are completely consistent with what they have been predicting as a consequence of man-made global warming," Gore write in a blog post. The Nobel Prize-winning former vice president was responding to a question posed by Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, who wondered on air why global warming was such an urgent science policy priority when the New York City area had become a “tundra” this winter.

Now comes word that a Greenpeace member fears Gore may have done untold damage to the environmental movement. Fred Pearce at Short Sharp Science attended a three-day conference in Portugal last week consisting of 28 bloggers, climate scientists, and what he called "professional contrarians" who gnawed over the looming issue of climate. He revealed:

The meeting was the brainchild of University of Oxford science philosopher Jerry Ravetz, an 81-year-old Greenpeace member who fears Al Gore may have done as much damage to environmentalism as Joseph Stalin did to socialism.

Interestingly enough, no meeting of the minds was made at the conference as it was decided that the make-up of those attending was "too lopsided in favour of the sceptical camp."

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/opinion-zone/2011/02/al-gore-claims-global-warming-caused-weeks-historic-blizzard#ixzz1D0m8GlHn

[actsnoblemartin]

global warming is the reason some men cant get laid and why some women cant get pregnant.

I dont know gore blames global warming on everything

:lol:

[red states rule]

The lone conservative on the panel makes the best point

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/T4sCxlEsSCQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[sundaydriver]

Unfortunately people see what they want to see. Having worked in the sciences most of my life I prefer physics over ideology. Where some take that it is cold and snowy therefore global warming can not be, I prefer to reason cause and effect minus natural trends. It is a shame that something so important to us all has become nothing but a political game for those that it is convient to do so.

[texastom]

Unfortunately people see what they want to see. Having worked in the sciences most of my life I prefer physics over ideology. Where some take that it is cold and snowy therefore global warming can not be, I prefer to reason cause and effect minus natural trends. It is a shame that something so important to us all has become nothing but a political game for those that choose so.What about natural cycles?

[sundaydriver]

Originally Posted by sundaydriver
Unfortunately people see what they want to see. Having worked in the sciences most of my life I prefer physics over ideology. Where some take that it is cold and snowy therefore global warming can not be, I prefer to reason cause and effect minus natural trends. It is a shame that something so important to us all has become nothing but a political game for those that choose so.




What about natural cycles?

Our weather is also affected by the temperature of the Earths core which does go thru cycles.

[texastom]

Originally Posted by sundaydriver
Unfortunately people see what they want to see. Having worked in the sciences most of my life I prefer physics over ideology. Where some take that it is cold and snowy therefore global warming can not be, I prefer to reason cause and effect minus natural trends. It is a shame that something so important to us all has become nothing but a political game for those that choose so.

Our weather is also affected by the temperature of the Earths core which does go thru cycles.

Well, it could be people take that view because it has been shoved down our throats that because we had a few years of warmer temperatures, it was PROOF we had global warming.

So now that the last couple of years have not only been cooler, but MUCH cooler, people automatically expect that the opposite must be true. Those that chant the global warming (now climate change, since that fits their agenda better) mantra are not getting an earful of their own.

Too many take a very small snapshot of time and try to act as with that limited data they can prove whatever the current "cause du jour".

[logroller]

There are natural trends of global cooling and warming, the causes of which endure much speculation, as global climate systems are difficult, if not impossible, to test in a scientific manner. However, comparitive analysis of societies' responses to these natural cycles, specifically those of resource depletion and sustainable technologies, plays a decisive role in a society's endurance. The issue isn't rather climate change is happening, because it has before and will again, but rather such changes will cause our society to thrive or suffer. Thus far, our practices have caused us to thrive, but so did the Vikings and Mayans. We can remain ignorant to the challenges of our society, pursuing growth over sustainability, but I prefer to have a society which is remembered more for it's caution and survival than it's expansion and collapse.

[red states rule]

There are natural trends of global cooling and warming, the causes of which endure much speculation, as global climate systems are difficult, if not impossible, to test in a scientific manner. However, comparitive analysis of societies' responses to these natural cycles, specifically those of resource depletion and sustainable technologies, plays a decisive role in a society's endurance. The issue isn't rather climate change is happening, because it has before and will again, but rather such changes will cause our society to thrive or suffer. Thus far, our practices have caused us to thrive, but so did the Vikings and Mayans. We can remain ignorant to the challenges of our society, pursuing growth over sustainability, but I prefer to have a society which is remembered more for it's caution and survival than it's expansion and collapse.

Why do you think it is now called "climate change"?

When I was in HS the SS teacher "taught" us about global cooking and the coming Ice Age

Then it was global warming and how man was heating up the planet

Those did not work so they came up with climate change so ANYTHING weather related can be held up as example for the enviro wackos to demand more taxpayer money for their agenda

[bullypulpit]

Ummm, Red, in highschool science class do ya remember when the teacher dropped a chunk of dry ice into a beaker of water? the warmer gas pushed the colder CO2 fog up and over the rim of the beaker. This weather is the same principle on a global scale. Warmer water and currents in the northern oceans create warmer air at the surface, which creates a column of rising warm air which displaces the colder air...displaces it south. It's a simple scientific principle, Red. And even though I'm well aware you and your fellow travelers operate in a fact-free environment, I'll provide a link to solid, scientific fact.

<center><a href=http://climateprogress.org/2010/06/03/nasa-giss-james-hansen-study-global-warming-record-hottest-year/>NASA: The 12-month running mean global temperature has reached a new record in 2010 — despite recent minimum of solar irradiance</a></center>

[red states rule]

I will let Dems do the talking now

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Tt6RXuWKzQs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[logroller]

Why do you think it is now called "climate change"?

When I was in HS the SS teacher "taught" us about global cooking and the coming Ice Age

Then it was global warming and how man was heating up the planet

Those did not work so they came up with climate change so ANYTHING weather related can be held up as example for the enviro wackos to demand more taxpayer money for their agenda

I think they call it climate change because it is the most accurate term for describing the dynamics of earth's systems, including weather patterns, ocean levels and currents, (de)glaciation etc. Global Warming is less descriptive, as warming indicates a trend which will continue and, in light of historical climate anaylsis, it is unknown to what extent the current trend will take. What we are sure of is that these trends can have a widespread effects upon plant and animal ecologies as well as human civilizations.

We can debate the current need for climate research if you wish, but understand the scope and magnitude of climate change doesn't revolve around our civilization. In the short-run, we need to survive; in the long run, we're dead -- classic dichotomy.

You must understand its not about what we want or prefer in terms of happiness or public good; its about the success of our civilization over others, and we're already in the minority by population. What can we do to extend the short-run 20 years? 50 years? 200 years? More importantly, when does the short-run begin, or has it already???

[red states rule]

I think they call it climate change because it is the most accurate term for describing the dynamics of earth's systems, including weather patterns, ocean levels and currents, (de)glaciation etc. Global Warming is less descriptive, as warming indicates a trend which will continue and, in light of historical climate anaylsis, it is unknown to what extent the current trend will take. What we are sure of is that these trends can have a widespread effects upon plant and animal ecologies as well as human civilizations.

We can debate the current need for climate research if you wish, but understand the scope and magnitude of climate change doesn't revolve around our civilization. In the short-run, we need to survive; in the long run, we're dead -- classic dichotomy.

You must understand its not about what we want or prefer in terms of happiness or public good; its about the success of our civilization over others, and we're already in the minority by population. What can we do to extend the short-run 20 years? 50 years? 200 years? More importantly, when does the short-run begin, or has it already???

It is all about MONEY. Like everything else with the left, they must make everything a "crisis" and only money will solve the crisis

Damn, I showed with their own words when it did NOT snow in DC it was global warming - and when it DID snow it was global warming

Even when the so called experts fake their data used to promote global warming it means nothing to them. They continue to promote the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the people

[logroller]

It is all about MONEY. Like everything else with the left, they must make everything a "crisis" and only money will solve the crisis

How is money gonna affect our abiliity to adapt to climate changes? I guess I could burn it to heat my house- better stock up on ones. What makes the world go round are resources. Millions of years worth of stored energy stored in fossil fuels is a precious resource to us. So important that we cant function without it, this is our achilles' heel, and if we fail to reduce our overconsumption to a more sustainable level, we will expedite our demise as a society.


Damn, I showed with their own words when it did NOT snow in DC it was global warming - and when it DID snow it was global warming

Believe it, don't believe it: I doubt anything I will say will compel you to participate in saving anything outside your pocketbook. But bear in mind, the extinct societies of yesteryear flourished too, and now they're gone. Take a guess why? It wasn't snow, or no snow, or lack of trade or overzealous governments. It is always the unsustainable use of resources.


Even when the so called experts fake their data used to promote global warming it means nothing to them. They continue to promote the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the people


Global warming is not even close to being as big a "scam" as fiat currency.

[red states rule]

How is money gonna affect our abiliity to adapt to climate changes? I guess I could burn it to heat my house- better stock up on ones. What makes the world go round are resources. Millions of years worth of stored energy stored in fossil fuels is a precious resource to us. So important that we cant function without it, this is our achilles' heel, and if we fail to reduce our overconsumption to a more sustainable level, we will expedite our demise as a society.



Believe it, don't believe it: I doubt anything I will say will compel you to participate in saving anything outside your pocketbook. But bear in mind, the extinct societies of yesteryear flourished too, and now they're gone. Take a guess why? It wasn't snow, or no snow, or lack of trade or overzealous governments. It is always the unsustainable use of resources.




Global warming is not even close to being as big a "scam" as fiat currency.

Dems want to regulate Co2 to stop global wamring :R. This will cause the cost of EVERYTHING to skyrocket

Don't take my word for it - here is Obama himself


<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/HlTxGHn4sH4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


Cap and Trade will further sink our economy as had other Obama policies

and global warming is a scam






Weather Channel boss calls global warming 'the greatest scam in history'
By Our Foreign Staff 11:14AM GMT 09 Nov 2007
190 Comments
The founder of the The Weather Channel in the US has described the concept of global warming as 'the greatest scam in history' and accused global media of colluding with 'environmental extremists' to alarm the public.

The deceit behind global warming
Climate change is like 'World War Three'
"It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM," John Coleman wrote in an article published on ICECAP, the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, which is known for challenging widely published theories on global warming.

The maverick weather forecaster is known for his regular critique of widely accepted global warming theories. The Weather Channel broadcasts weather forecasts and weather-related news in the US 24 hours a day.

His views challenge the consensus of the international science community that it is at least 90 per cent certain that temperatures will continue to rise, with average global surface temperature projected to increase by between 1.4 and 5.8ºC above 1990 levels by 2100.

This increase will be accompanied by rising sea levels, more intense precipitation events in some countries, increased risk of drought in others, and adverse effects on agriculture, health and water resources.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3313785/Weather-Channel-boss-calls-global-warming-the-greatest-scam-in-history.html

[actsnoblemartin]

al gore, i cant even put together how fundamentally stupid the man is

[red states rule]

and here is Joe Biden on coal plants. Yea nothng to worry about with the polices of treehuggers right?

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/iJ55UzAsp6M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[actsnoblemartin]

It reminds of a proverb I made up but i bet its been written in others ways

Stupidity can be dangerous

[red states rule]

and of course when the enviro wackos and libs ae losing the debate out comes the doom and gloom crap

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=XdZueu2GSU" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=XdZueu2GSU" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[revelarts]

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fr5O1HsTVgA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>



Japan Boffin: Global warming isn't man-made
Climate science is 'ancient astrology', claims report

Excerpts and commentary on the article.

"The NASA's ex-climate boss is now a CO2 Climate Change Skeptic and says many IPPC source data records are incorrect and possibly just plain made up.

""I'm a sceptic now, says ex-NASA climate boss
Hansen supervisor takes aim at thermageddon
By Andrew Orlowski
Posted in Environment, 28th January 2009 14:18 GMT

The retired scientist formerly in charge of key NASA climate programs has come out as a sceptic.

Dr John Theon, who supervised James Hansen - the activist-scientist who helped give the manmade global warming hypothesis centre prominent media attention - repents at length in a published letter. Theon wrote to the Minority Office at the Environment and Public Works Committee on January 15, 2009, and excerpts were published by skeptic Senator Inhofe's office here last night.

"As Chief of several of NASA Headquarters’ programs (1982-94), an SES position, I was responsible for all weather and climate research in the entire agency, including the research work by James Hansen, Roy Spencer, Joanne Simpson, and several hundred other scientists at NASA field centers, in academia, and in the private sector who worked on climate research," Theon wrote. "I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that global warming is man made.”

Theon takes aim at the models, and implicitly criticises Hansen for revising to the data set:

“My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit. Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it.

"They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy.”".....
....

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uu9fprxnkEI&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uu9fprxnkEI&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>


<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dIbTJ6mhCqk?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dIbTJ6mhCqk?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>


<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FfHW7KR33IQ?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FfHW7KR33IQ?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>


<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/orfX_nbYTSs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[red states rule]

With tree huggers, never allow facts to be brought into the debate




snip


1. Where does the data come from? Average temperatures globally last year were 0.95 degrees Fahrenheit (0.53 Celsius) higher than the 1961-90 mean that is used for comparison purposes, according to the WMO -- a statement based on three climate data sets from U.K. and U.S. weather agencies. They gather readings from land-based weather and climate stations, ships and buoys, and satellites -- and they've come under dramatic scrutiny in recent years.

The land data is being challenged extensively by Anthony Watt on his SurfaceStations.org website. Watts recently graded 61% of the stations used to measure temperature with a D -- for being located less than 10 meters from an artificial heating source. Many climate skeptics also take issue with NASA and NOAA, the U.S. agencies that gather U.S. climate data, but also manipulate and "normalize" it.

Satellite data is arguably the most accurate way to measure temperature. Roy Spencer, a climatologist and former NASA scientist, takes issue with the way that data is normalized and adjusted, instead presenting raw, unadjusted data on his website. The WMO does not use this data.

Watts pointed FoxNews.com to a new, peer-reviewed paper that looks at the reliability of the land-based sensor network, concluding that "it is presently impossible to quantify the warming trend in global climate."

2. There's less ice is in the oceans. Or more. Or something. The WMO report notes that Arctic sea-ice cover in December 2010 was the lowest on record, with an average monthly extent of 12 million square kilometers, 1.35 million square kilometers below the 1979-2000 average for December. The agency called it the third-lowest minimum ice extent recorded in September.

In fact, the overall sea-ice record shows virtually no change throughout the past 30 years, argued Lord Monckton, a British politician, journalist, and noted skeptic of global warming. He points out that "the quite rapid loss of Arctic sea ice since the satellites were watching has been matched by a near-equally rapid gain of Antarctic sea ice."

When the summer Arctic sea ice reached its lowest point in the 30-year record in mid-September 2007, just three weeks later the Antarctic sea extent reached a 30-year record high, Monckton said.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/01/24/planet-hottest-ever-global-warming/

[actsnoblemartin]

facts vs feelings :laugh:

[red states rule]

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oZrhG2iT3H0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>