Global Warming At It Again

December 27th, 2007 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Global warming again. “Denver breaks record for snowfall on Christmas day.”

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Dustin Metzger
    December 27th, 2007 at 18:40
    Reply | Quote | #1

    You’re talking weather, not overall climate.  As long as global mean temperature continues to climb local weather patterns are insignificant.  Here in Wisconsin we’ve had the wost snowfalls in the last couple of years just within month and, most likely, it’s because it’s been warmer than usual.  If it’s as cold as it usually is the snow/ice storms of last week would likely never have happened…

  2. cdeegan
    December 27th, 2007 at 18:45
    Reply | Quote | #2

    It’s not global warming any more, it’s "climate change."

  3. Xel
    December 27th, 2007 at 20:57
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Proof by anecdote is an oxymoron.

    In the big sea of data, debate and hard science, this event is a drop.

  4. Bill W
    December 28th, 2007 at 06:26
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Climatology and the science of "climate change" is not considered hard science.  I agree with Dustin that you’re talking weather – but that does not keep the global warming nimrods from claiming that Katrina was caused by climate change, and that all manners of ‘bad" weather examples are caused by global warming.  Even though as little as four years ago, they were saying if we did not do anything, the effects would be felt fifty years from now.  But, through the inflation of the sensational, it became thirty, then twenty, then NOW IT IS UPON US!  So much for hard science and the computer models.

  5. Xel
    December 28th, 2007 at 09:16
    Reply | Quote | #5

    "but that does not keep the global warming nimrods from claiming that Katrina was caused by climate change"

    All of them? Why is it that many of those berating us AGW-believers (and I am ready to admit this is belief) for making things to easy for ourselves do the same thing, especially while lambasting? 

    "But, through the inflation of the sensational, it became thirty, then twenty, then NOW IT IS UPON US!"

    Things are going worse than they expected as they look upon the coral reefs and the glaciers. Are you going to complain about  said inanimate natural phenomenon being attention-seeking drama queens soon?

  6. Tully
    December 29th, 2007 at 00:34
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Yeah, the world had perfectly constant climate for the billions of years before we made the scene.

    What’s that? It didn’t? Never mind.

  7. Xel
    December 29th, 2007 at 00:44
    Reply | Quote | #7

    "Yeah, the world had perfectly constant climate for the billions of years before we made the scene. What’s that? It didn’t? Never mind."

    Yeah, this will come as a total surprise to us dogmatist warm-mongers. What’s that? Our weak and sensationalist attempts at science has taken that into account? Ho hum.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.