Hi 17° | Lo -7°

Letter: You call this warming?

Well, what do I tell my friends now? Is this called “man-made global warming,” “man-made climate change” or just “weather”?

Looks like Al Gore was right when he chose the “hockey stick graph” after all! Can we ask Gore to fly his corporate jet over New Hampshire? Looks like we need just a wee bit more CO2 in our atmosphere this year, but not too much, please.

We don’t want it to be hot in July when the annual global warming/climate change/weather predictions come during the also-annual heat wave.

Of course, as I look out on all the global warming/climate change/weather accumulating not in inches, but feet, you understand my anticipation! Better get back to shoveling my global warming/climate change/weather – 10 more inches just fell.

Now, I know I left my old can of Freon around here somewhere – oh yes, there it is, right behind the latest publication from the Flat Earth Society.



Legacy Comments35

For those that are into reading humorous news articles you may want to google "The Global Warming Policy Foundation". Well worth the read. Here is a snippet of what you will find ------------"Lord Lawson’s climate-change think tank (TGWPF) faces being dismantled or even wound down after a formal complaint that it has persistently misled the public prompted the statutory regulator to probe into the group. Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) in November 2009 it has “persistently disseminated inaccurate and misleading information about climate change as part of its campaign against climate policies in the UK and overseas,” the complaint alleges. The use of factually inaccurate material without a legitimate basis in science is an abuse of the foundation’s charitable status, which is all the more reprehensible because the public is more trusting of pronouncements made by charities....."--------------- Their integrity has not improved since then either. Since BestPresidentReagan AKA Sail constantly refers to this group of nattering nabobs of negativity, (gotta luv the Nixon years) it speaks volumes on the integrity of said posts.

I was naïve and for a while I actually looked up some of these sites with these astonishing claims until I realized they all had one thing in common. They were right wing sites with an agenda, that quoted from other right wing sources. Useless.

Warren Buffett: Supposed Increase in Extreme Weather 'Hasn't Been True So Far' - See more at:

BPR: Buffet is NOT saying that there's no global warming or no climate change. He's simply saying that on average, SO FAR, it has not affected the weather to the point that insurance companies are paying out more. Here's his exact quote: "the effects of climate change, if any, have not affected our - they have not affected the insurance market." Once again, you are conflating weather and climate, and you are asking us to believe that Buffet (who is not a climatologist) said something he didn't.

I see much "Harping" from the Harp per Minutus crowd here as expected. Hiding behind the veil of "settled" science we see copied and pasted facts from unreliable climate change sites where the Harpers continue to harvest their talking points. As they say, figures don't lie but we all realize that liars sure can figure.

Good one again

Somehow we need to overcome the simplistic all-or-nothing view of climate change, global warming, whatever people want to call it. "Global warming" does not mean that it's constantly getting warmer everywhere on earth. Climate is more like economy. When we say that the economy is improving, it does not mean that 100% of the people and businesses in the economy are getting richer. Some will get richer, some will get poorer, but the average over all is improving. It's the same thing with climate - some places get hotter, some get colder. Some get wetter, some get drier. But the average over all is hotter and wetter. (And wetter, by the way, means more snow as well as more rain. They're both the same thing, after all - water falling from the sky.) So, the snow level in your back yard and the temperature on your deck are no more indicative of global climate, than the the amount of money in your wallet on any given day is indicative of economy.

Our planet has always been in constant change. It will continue to change. It NEEDS to change. It is the nature of the beast - for our own good or not. How Man be so arrogant to think it can control it is absolutly beyond me.

We are controlling it by making it man made and not letting it happen naturally. That is the point.

Personally I think Mother Earth can take care of herself. She will shake us off like a bad habit if she so desires and if she does it is meant to be.

Tillie, How do you know this? Do you have an alternate parallel earth your keeping up your sleeve where you can see what out weather would be like had we not burned fossil fuel?

Don't confuse weather and climate. So your plan is do nothing. Lets just wait and see what happens. Sounds like the usual Republican plan. Some people actually believe in science. I am one of them.

I refer you back to my first post.

Cy, there are multiple lines of temperature evidence, some going back hundreds of thousands of years, right up to the present, plus the dramatic evidence of shrinking glaciers and ice caps, as proof that the present warming is real, and unique in the paleo record. The computer models scientists use only work to explain the present warming when they account for the contribution of greenhouse gases. Nothing else explains the warming--not changes in the sun, not cosmic rays, not ocean currents--nada. Fossil carbon has a specific molecular signature--the radioactive isotope of C that all carbon from living things possesses has long since decayed. No one can say what the climate (not weather) would be like were we not adding extra CO2 to the atmosphere. That's a "what if" that is beside the fact. Human actions ARE warming the planet, and future warming is going to occur faster than many plants and animals can adapt, and the effects of future warming will be very disruptive to most, if not all of humankind. Therefore, WE have an obligation--a moral obligation--to deal with the problem. Denying there is a problem, and thinking we can go on with business as usual--as powerful vested interests would have us do--or throwing up our hands and saying there is nothing we can do, are both wrong. We're better than that.

Your comment ignores the fact that the current warming--which is incontestable--is largely due to our burning of fossil fuels. We're on track to double the level of CO2 from pre-industrial levels (280 ppm) by 2050. This is likely at a faster rate, and to a higher level than the planet has experienced in millions of years. The link between greenhouse gases and warming is long established. The real arrogance is in thinking that our actions have NO consequences, or only benign ones (e.g.: "carbon dioxide is plant food"). It helps to think of the atmosphere as an ocean--which it is. If air had the same density as water, our entire atmosphere would be about 30 feet deep. Seemingly small changes--greenhouse gases like CO2 are naturally a tiny fraction of our atmosphere--can have big effects. They raise our planet's average temp by about 45 degrees F. Adding another 5 degrees of warmth on top of this, as rapidly as we seem to be doing, is going to be devastating to many plants and animals--they won't be able to adapt fast enough. Whether we ourselves will be able to adapt is an open question. If we decide to acknowledge reality and begin to act, we'll help our grandchildren avoid having to find out.

HEADLINES: Greenpeace Co-Founder Tells U.S. Senate: Earth’s Geologic History ‘fundamentally contradicts’ CO2 Climate Fears: ‘We had both higher temps and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today’

Apples and oranges. Left unsaid is the fact that during the period of geologic history referred to by the "Greenpeace co-founder"--500 million years ago--well before the age of dinosaurs-- the sun was also several percent dimmer than it is today. The threshold for glaciation then might have been as high as 3000 ppm of CO2. Over the last 650,000 years, temperature and CO2 levels have gone hand in hand--when temps are high, so are CO2 levels. It's a complex cycle that involves long-term cyclical changes in our planet's orbit and tilt. Over this time, CO2 levels fluctuated between about 180 and 280 ppm. Changes in climate, initiated by orbital changes, change CO2 levels, and CO2 levels in turn affect climate.

Bruce, I see how passionate you are regarding this topic and I respect that but I am sorry to say all I hear is "the sky is falling, the sky is falling".

It is not passion, it is obsession and ideological blindness. Almost robotic, harping on the same thing each and every day as if anyone reads the long cut and paste diagrams.

Cy, what we're doing now with CO2 has been compared to poking a sharp stick at a beast--a climate beast if you will. There's nothing natural about the fact we are adding extra carbon dioxide so quickly and in such amounts to the planet's thermostat. What we are doing is disrupting our planet's climate cycles, in ways that may be only partly predictable, except that none are likely to be benign.

the entire us is only 2% of the earths surface...but only when its cold. If there is a hurricane or a instantly becomes "global". Cold again this week and next...I wonder if they will have to fire up the jet fuel generators???

Yea, reminds me of another poster on here who brought up the lack of hurricane season to jibe about "what extreme weather?'. While Europe and the British Isles were battling major storms for months. Not to mention the "storm of the century" to hit the Philippines. As if the US was all that mattered, though Alaska is suffering from melting ice caps.

The MET office predicted a dry winter....NOAA predicted above average temps for the US...

The fact that sometimes weather predictions turn out to be inaccurate does not invalidate a century's worth of climate measurements, all indicating an upward trend in average global temperature.

So professor, man caused this? Can man reverse it?

You're confusing weather and climate. And the NOAA forecast came with caveats and qualifications which you conveniently overlook about the difficulty of predicting conditions in the absence of clear El Nino or La Nina conditions in the Pacific, even mentioning the Arctic Oscillation, which has contributed to making our winter cold and snowy: "'It’s a challenge to produce a long-term winter forecast without the climate pattern of an El Niño or a La Niña in place out in the Pacific because those climate patterns often strongly influence winter temperature and precipitation here in the United States,' said Mike Halpert, acting director of NOAA’s Climate Center: 'Without this strong seasonal influence, winter weather is often affected by short-term climate patterns, such as the Arctic Oscillation, that are not predictable beyond a week or two. So it’s important to pay attention to your local daily weather forecast throughout the winter.'”

And the old farmer's almanac predicted a colder and snowier than normal winter. Granted, they've predicted that same thing the past three years in a row - but this time they were right. Predictions, Schmedictions . . . the Earth's climate has been and always will be in a constant state of change. To think that humans alone - by altering their activities - can change it is idiotic. But to sit there and proudly waste even more resources needlessly in some sort of boneheaded, flag-waving salute to "Uhmurica" is just as idiotic.

re the recent weather in the British Isles...the 2 previous winters were dry..the Met said because of climate change, the winters will now be with this recent weather...they said the winters will now be wet....they have no clue

Per Tillie - "storm of the century" to hit the Philippines " - ACTUAL FACT - only the 6th worst storm

Fact? Whose fact? This century is fourteen years old, which century are you talking about? As usual you missed the point. Which was; just because US has not had a bad hurricane season, doesn't mean the rest of the world didn't either. You can change the bulb, but it won't be any brighter.

After you’re done chuckling, what do you tell your friends? That you’re in need of a geography lesson, for starters. The last time I checked, neither New Hampshire, New England, the eastern U.S., nor even the entire U.S. included very much of the planet’s surface. In fact, the entire U.S, including Alaska, occupies less than 2% of the earth’s surface. Including the weather for the rest of the planet, January 2014 was the 4th warmest January since 1880. Southern hemisphere land masses had their warmest January ever. This January was the 9th consecutive month in which average global temperatures were among the ten warmest for their respective months. In fact, January 2014 was the 347th month in a row in which the planet’s average temperature was above the 20th century average. The last month with an average temperature below the 20th century average was February, 1985.

to counteract the daily screed from the minister of disinformation are these headlines you can google to get the truth. 1) Report: 95 percent of global warming models are wrong 2) Report from the Office of the Inspector General: Global Climate Change Program Data May Be Unreliable 3) Debunking the 97% ´consensus´ on global warming 4) UK Met Office: Global Temperature Standstill Continues 5) NASA and NOAA Confirm Global Temperature Standstill Continues 6) Arctic Sea Ice Extent Same As 40 Years Ago 7) Arctic Sea Ice Extent Same As 40 Years Ago 8) A new report published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation concludes that there has been no increase in extreme weather events in recent decades. 9) Alarmist climate scientists have abused the public trust in science, inflicted serious and long-lived damage 10) The Ocean Thermometer reveals Global Warming Lies..... google any of these titles to learn the truth about the globul warming alarmist religion

The poster should feel free to dispute the facts I posted above. Not one of those headlines from BPR/sail comes from the actual science, and not one accurately or truthfully reports on the science. Instead, they're all rip-n-read headlines from well-known outlets for climate science denial. The facts regarding our warming planet are readily available, at any real science source like NASA or NOAA.

" 6) Arctic Sea Ice Extent Same As 40 Years Ago 7) Arctic Sea Ice Extent Same As 40 Years Ago -------------- " Quite a statement you generated with your "make-up my facts app". Now for the the truth (I know a completely unknown term, get a dictionary) ----------- "Two facts were apparent over the course of the three-day conference: (1) sea ice in the Arctic is shrinking—more rapidly than scientists originally predicted, ....." link Seems like a case of "What are you going to believe, me, or your eyes"

to be informed readers need to look at the following FACTS to see how on a daily basis the Alarmists always try and spoof you.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.