Global Warming/Climate Change/Global Weirding?

[waterboy]

It comes down to this. Some people mix a little whiskey with their 7. Others prefer a splash of 7 with their whiskey. G & G prefer to mix a little science with their politics. Very little.

[guido911]

If it snows too much, it's global whatever. If it snows too little, it's global whatever. Too much rain, too little rain...blah blah blah. Everything is global whatever's fault.

Face it. Those dems in the video I posted put their collective foots in their mouths.

[nathanm]

Attention all. If you disagree with waterboy, you apparently are now a drunk.

Edited to add: Nice..guido edited his post..

[we vs us]

If it snows too much, it's global whatever. If it snows too little, it's global whatever. Too much rain, too little rain...blah blah blah. Everything is global whatever's fault.

Face it. Those dems in the video I posted put their collective foots in their mouths.

I'm actually interested in who's blaming this snowstorm on global warming.  So far I've only seen you and Gassy do it, as well as select moronic talking heads on (right leaning) TV.  Has anyone with any sort of scientific rep at all put the two together?  

Related:  a great article from the Christian Science Monitor on weather/climate variations that doesn't once mention climate change.

EDIT:  your youtube link may have that in it . . . I can't view them at work.

[guido911]

I'm actually interested in who's blaming this snowstorm on global warming.  So far I've only seen you and Gassy do it, as well as select moronic talking heads on (right leaning) TV.  Has anyone with any sort of scientific rep at all put the two together?  

Related:  a great article from the Christian Science Monitor on weather/climate variations that doesn't once mention climate change.

EDIT:  your youtube link may have that in it . . . I can't view them at work.

I was making a joke about the cold outside and essentially how I would like some warming. Not taken well by the true believers in here. As for the concept of global whatever, the facts are so all over the place that its impossible for me to know the truth--much less care.

[Gaspar]

Any issue that can rally people around a cause gives politicians power. 

You can support causes or pursue goals.  The difference is that goals have an alpha point and omega point, a start and finish.  Causes go on forever because no amount of achievement can satisfy them. No information can discredit them.  They are emotionally driven.

I pursue my goals while I watch liberals writhe, twist and bend in the eternal dance to push the boulder up the hill.

If a million scientists publish a million studies using a million data sources showing that the world was actually cooling, it would make no difference.  The cooling would be backwards engineered to be a product of the warming.  The cause is eternal until the politicians behind it move on or lose interest and the grants that drive the research evaporate.

The dance is entertaining but expensive.

[we vs us]

If a million scientists publish a million studies using a million data sources showing that the world was actually cooling, it would make no difference.  

This is probably the nut of your comment.  And maybe all the comments on this thread.  It would make no difference.  You can't be proven anything to.

EDIT:  "proven anything to" is pretty tortured syntax.  That's what I get for trying to type while on hold with a client. 

[nathanm]

If a million scientists publish a million studies using a million data sources showing that the world was actually cooling, it would make no difference.  The cooling would be backwards engineered to be a product of the warming.  The cause is eternal until the politicians behind it move on or lose interest and the grants that drive the research evaporate.

This statement is so ridiculous, this can be my only response:

[guido911]

Any issue that can rally people around a cause gives politicians power. 

You can support causes or pursue goals.  The difference is that goals have an alpha point and omega point, a start and finish.  Causes go on forever because no amount of achievement can satisfy them. No information can discredit them.  They are emotionally driven.

I pursue my goals while I watch liberals writhe, twist and bend in the eternal dance to push the boulder up the hill.

If a million scientists publish a million studies using a million data sources showing that the world was actually cooling, it would make no difference.  The cooling would be backwards engineered to be a product of the warming.  The cause is eternal until the politicians behind it move on or lose interest and the grants that drive the research evaporate.

The dance is entertaining but expensive.

I think there is something more at play here. As folks in this forum know, I am deeply Christian and anti-abortion. Now, if I talk publicly about people changing traditional Christmas themes, I'm apparently intolerant. If I applaud efforts to restrict or ban abortion on demand rights, I'm a right wing nut job. In this case, because I do not give a crap about global whatever, I'm what: a knuckle-dragging neanderthal idiot? It doesn't matter that I have more education than those who think of me that way. Why is it that the left can't be tolerant of the opinions of those folks with whom they disagree?

[guido911]

To footnote my previous point, I freely admit that I have gone after many people in this forum whose beliefs are counter to mine--particularly when it comes to tax policy. To that end, I think Gaspar's post that has triggered this sh!tstorm is spot on. Emotion can get in the way of rational discussion.

Oh, and Nate, thanks for proving my point.

[guido911]

EDIT:  your youtube link may have that in it . . . I can't view them at work.

The video was a compilation of several dem leaders (Byrd, Boxer, et. al.) complaining about how little amounts of snow proves climate change. That's all.

[Gaspar]

This statement is so ridiculous, this can be my only response:

You think?
Look at what is happening now.  By 2010 we were supposed to be in dire straits with shoreline disappearing, extinctions, and a multitude of other warming related catastrophes.  Instead we find ourselves leveling out on temperature even though our carbon output globally has increased.  Manhattan is still around, as is the California coast.  The polar bears are still eating seals and their population is higher than ever. 

As all of these things have come to pass. . . gently, the definition of the movement has been re-tooled.  The effects may be different but the root-causes must remain the same.  Industry = bad.

Global Warming by whatever name they generate remains a powerful political force, re-tooled, re-engineered and colorized for a new generation to enjoy!   

[guido911]

Whatever happened to the global cooling from the 1970s. Just askin.

[Gaspar]

Whatever happened to the global cooling from the 1970s. Just askin.

It evolved into Global Warming.  Please try to keep up!

[nathanm]

You think?
Look at what is happening now.  By 2010 we were supposed to be in dire straits with shoreline disappearing, extinctions, and a multitude of other warming related catastrophes.  Instead we find ourselves leveling out on temperature even though our carbon output globally has increased.  Manhattan is still around, as is the California coast.  The polar bears are still eating seals and their population is higher than ever. 

I think you've been listening to too much utter bullshit. The only thing we should be seeing now according to long-held predictions are melting ice caps, increasing global average temperatures, and possibly some ocean acidification. The dramatic effects you seem to think were predicted for now are 50-100 year effects. Even Al Gore's hyperbolic movie didn't claim that these effects would be apparent by 2011.

Global average temperature temporarily slowed its increase because we had the deepest solar minimum since the 1600s! Even with the sun putting out significantly less energy than it normally does, the Earth continues to warm. Funny, that.

It's no wonder you refuse to acknowledge the facts. You don't have them at hand.