"Extraordinary" weather as a symptom of "climate change"

[westwall]

Lots of alarmists are falling all over themselves claiming that this most recent snowmageddon is proof positive that climate change is occuring. They consistently ignore the weather extremes of the past and call them "irrelevent" because now we have GHG's in higher abundance etc. etc. etc.

They are the definition of anti science. Science says that before you can search for something out of the ordinary as a cause of any particular observed phenomena you must first eliminate all possible "normal" explanations.

Here is a wonderful example from 1921. We have had a few areas in this latest blizzard hit 20+ inches of snow. Yet those don't hold a candle to the blast of '21 when one particular are recieved 75.8 inches of snow...in a single day. It fell in Silver Lake CO.

There are many more examples of extreme weather from the past and some are quite amazing.

"At Mt Shasta Ski Bowl, California, 4.8 meters (or 15.75 feet) of snow fell in a single snowstorm between February 13 and 19, 1959 – making it the snowiest snowstorm in the United States."

"A total of 451 inches of snow were found on the ground at Tamarack, California on March 11, 1911, which was deemed a record for the deepest snow depth. The snow accumulated over time and did not come from a single storm."

" The biggest piece of ice recorded on earth was an ice block that measured 6 meters (20 ft) across, which fell in Scotland on August 13, 1849."

There are many more if you just choose to look for them.

 

[skookerasbil]

Lots of alarmists are falling all over themselves claiming that this most recent snowmageddon is proof positive that climate change is occuring. They consistently ignore the weather extremes of the past and call them "irrelevent" because now we have GHG's in higher abundance etc. etc. etc.

They are the definition of anti science. Science says that before you can search for something out of the ordinary as a cause of any particular observed phenomena you must first eliminate all possible "normal" explanations.

Here is a wonderful example from 1921. We have had a few areas in this latest blizzard hit 20+ inches of snow. Yet those don't hold a candle to the blast of '21 when one particular are recieved 75.8 inches of snow...in a single day. It fell in Silver Lake CO.

There are many more examples of extreme weather from the past and some are quite amazing.

"At Mt Shasta Ski Bowl, California, 4.8 meters (or 15.75 feet) of snow fell in a single snowstorm between February 13 and 19, 1959 – making it the snowiest snowstorm in the United States."

"A total of 451 inches of snow were found on the ground at Tamarack, California on March 11, 1911, which was deemed a record for the deepest snow depth. The snow accumulated over time and did not come from a single storm."

" The biggest piece of ice recorded on earth was an ice block that measured 6 meters (20 ft) across, which fell in Scotland on August 13, 1849."

There are many more if you just choose to look for them.

WFT Wait a good damn minute West..........you mean weather extremes didnt start after 1998??

 

[jillian]

Lots of alarmists are falling all over themselves claiming that this most recent snowmageddon is proof positive that climate change is occuring. They consistently ignore the weather extremes of the past and call them "irrelevent" because now we have GHG's in higher abundance etc. etc. etc.

the science on this is pretty clear. i don't think it requires hysteria, but it does require intelligent response.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lots of alarmists are falling all over themselves claiming that this most recent snowmageddon is proof positive that climate change is occuring. They consistently ignore the weather extremes of the past and call them "irrelevent" because now we have GHG's in higher abundance etc. etc. etc.

the science on this is pretty clear. i don't think it requires hysteria, but it does require intelligent response.

You mean like falsifying records to make it appear that it was not hot in the 30's? That kind of intelligent response? Or creating a graph that totally ignores a medieval warming period? That kind of Intelligent response?

How about being unable to prove that man is causing warming but repeating the claim over and over in hysterical tones? That kind of Intelligent response? How about falsifying world temperatures and lying about causes for glacier melt? That kind of Intelligent Response?

 

[westwall]

Lots of alarmists are falling all over themselves claiming that this most recent snowmageddon is proof positive that climate change is occuring. They consistently ignore the weather extremes of the past and call them "irrelevent" because now we have GHG's in higher abundance etc. etc. etc.

the science on this is pretty clear. i don't think it requires hysteria, but it does require intelligent response.

That's the problem Jillian, the science does NOT back them up one iota. Everytime they try to blame AGW for a particular event I can go back into the historical record and quite easily find an analog. There currently is no empirical data to support their theory. Instead of using actual records they use computer models that are so poor they can't recreate the weather of 5 days ago with perfect data recording. That is a huge problem. And as stated previously the records they do use have been corrupted. Hansen has been caught repeatedly going back into the historical record and altering the temperature data from over 50 years ago to try and get the US's temp record to conform to the false record he is building.

I agree that there are terrible environmental issues out there, but AGW is not one of them.

 

[Trajan]

'global warming' has been changed to 'climate change', duplicitous and ridiculous.

 

[Cuyo]

Lots of alarmists are falling all over themselves claiming that this most recent snowmageddon is proof positive that climate change is occuring. They consistently ignore the weather extremes of the past and call them "irrelevent" because now we have GHG's in higher abundance etc. etc. etc.

the science on this is pretty clear. i don't think it requires hysteria, but it does require intelligent response.

That's the problem Jillian, the science does NOT back them up one iota. Everytime they try to blame AGW for a particular event I can go back into the historical record and quite easily find an analog. There currently is no empirical data to support their theory. Instead of using actual records they use computer models that are so poor they can't recreate the weather of 5 days ago with perfect data recording. That is a huge problem. And as stated previously the records they do use have been corrupted. Hansen has been caught repeatedly going back into the historical record and altering the temperature data from over 50 years ago to try and get the US's temp record to conform to the false record he is building.

I agree that there are terrible environmental issues out there, but AGW is not one of them.

Ummm.... No. The science is solid and has been around for decades. They didn't wait for the symptom then assign the cause. They predicted this decades ago. Pretty much everything they've predicted would happen, is happening.

The sad thing is that deniers have even been elevated to the point of being considered worthy of addressing, when they should be acknowledged as the intellectual equivalent of a moon-landing denier.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

the science on this is pretty clear. i don't think it requires hysteria, but it does require intelligent response.

That's the problem Jillian, the science does NOT back them up one iota. Everytime they try to blame AGW for a particular event I can go back into the historical record and quite easily find an analog. There currently is no empirical data to support their theory. Instead of using actual records they use computer models that are so poor they can't recreate the weather of 5 days ago with perfect data recording. That is a huge problem. And as stated previously the records they do use have been corrupted. Hansen has been caught repeatedly going back into the historical record and altering the temperature data from over 50 years ago to try and get the US's temp record to conform to the false record he is building.

I agree that there are terrible environmental issues out there, but AGW is not one of them.

Ummm.... No. The science is solid and has been around for decades. They didn't wait for the symptom then assign the cause. They predicted this decades ago. Pretty much everything they've predicted would happen, is happening.

The sad thing is that deniers have even been elevated to the point of being considered worthy of addressing, when they should be acknowledged as the intellectual equivalent of a moon-landing denier.

Really? Explain the heat wave in the 30's? The heat wave on the poles from 1920's to 1940's? The medieval warming period?

Please if it is so well established provide us with the scientific experiment that was used to verify that man is causing the slight warming we are having? And the follow on to prove it worked. That is after all how science works.

History shows us clearly that warming PRECEDES CO2 not the other way around. But then that too is PROVEN science you all like to ignore.

If the facts are so clear explain why people keep "adjusting" previous years records, why they keep closing inconvenient temperature stations, why they keep adjusting current temps?

 

[Old Rocks]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

 

[Old Rocks]

'global warming' has been changed to 'climate change', duplicitous and ridiculous.

Oh get off it, ninny! Global warming refers to overall increase in temperature, the climate change refers to the changing patterns of precipitation, drougth, and wind.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

YOU keep claiming it is ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACT. Provide the evidence. It is not my job to prove a negative it is YOUR job to prove YOUR statement that Human caused global warming is occurring. YOU, not I keep claiming it is proven scientific fact. Trot out the science that proves it. Provide us "deniers" the scientific tests that prove man is causing global warming.

How hard can it be? You keep claiming post after post it is so. Provide us this crucial testing information.

 

[Cuyo]

That's the problem Jillian, the science does NOT back them up one iota. Everytime they try to blame AGW for a particular event I can go back into the historical record and quite easily find an analog. There currently is no empirical data to support their theory. Instead of using actual records they use computer models that are so poor they can't recreate the weather of 5 days ago with perfect data recording. That is a huge problem. And as stated previously the records they do use have been corrupted. Hansen has been caught repeatedly going back into the historical record and altering the temperature data from over 50 years ago to try and get the US's temp record to conform to the false record he is building.

I agree that there are terrible environmental issues out there, but AGW is not one of them.

Ummm.... No. The science is solid and has been around for decades. They didn't wait for the symptom then assign the cause. They predicted this decades ago. Pretty much everything they've predicted would happen, is happening.

The sad thing is that deniers have even been elevated to the point of being considered worthy of addressing, when they should be acknowledged as the intellectual equivalent of a moon-landing denier.

Really? Explain the heat wave in the 30's? The heat wave on the poles from 1920's to 1940's? The medieval warming period?

Please if it is so well established provide us with the scientific experiment that was used to verify that man is causing the slight warming we are having? And the follow on to prove it worked. That is after all how science works.

History shows us clearly that warming PRECEDES CO2 not the other way around. But then that too is PROVEN science you all like to ignore.

If the facts are so clear explain why people keep "adjusting" previous years records, why they keep closing inconvenient temperature stations, why they keep adjusting current temps?

Case and point, Retarded Gynecologist here.

 

[Cuyo]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

YOU keep claiming it is ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACT. Provide the evidence. It is not my job to prove a negative it is YOUR job to prove YOUR statement that Human caused global warming is occurring. YOU, not I keep claiming it is proven scientific fact. Trot out the science that proves it. Provide us "deniers" the scientific tests that prove man is causing global warming.

How hard can it be? You keep claiming post after post it is so. Provide us this crucial testing information.

What difference does it make? I could provide you with 100 links and you wouldn't read them. Even if you did, you'd still keep coming back with the same ridiculous sophistries. See, that's the problem with conspiracy theorists. You're so emotionally invested in your claim, however ridiculous and easily disproven it may be, that it generates a confirmation bias so powerful that you can't even see how wrong you are.

A little bit like a shitfaced asshole insisting he's "Not that drunk" even after everyone else at the party has told him to go lay down.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, lets see, have we had other interesting 'extroidinery weather' this year, other than this snowstorm? A bit of rain in Tennensse as I remember. Then there was the near total wipe out of the agriculter in Pakistan from the flooding there. And losses of crops from several flooding events in China. A minor matter of a 10% loss of grain crops in Europe, and 40% in Russia from heat and drougth. Argentina and Uraguay, major agriculteral losses from drougth. Big loss of wheat in Queensland, Australia from a major flood there, and the loss of 1/3 of the world's coking coal until they
get the water out of the mines and the railroad beds rebuilt. Of course Yasi was just a minor Cyclone, affecting only a few crops such as sugar and bananas. All in less than a years time.

Nothing out of the ordinery folks, just keep going, nothing to see here.

 

[Old Rocks]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

YOU keep claiming it is ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACT. Provide the evidence. It is not my job to prove a negative it is YOUR job to prove YOUR statement that Human caused global warming is occurring. YOU, not I keep claiming it is proven scientific fact. Trot out the science that proves it. Provide us "deniers" the scientific tests that prove man is causing global warming.

How hard can it be? You keep claiming post after post it is so. Provide us this crucial testing information.

OK, dummy.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

There is the address. Physicists explaining the physics of global warming. Far better than a millwright could explain it to you. But you will not read it. Nor will you read anything that might disturb you comfortable alternative universe view of reality.

 

[Old Rocks]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

YOU keep claiming it is ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACT. Provide the evidence. It is not my job to prove a negative it is YOUR job to prove YOUR statement that Human caused global warming is occurring. YOU, not I keep claiming it is proven scientific fact. Trot out the science that proves it. Provide us "deniers" the scientific tests that prove man is causing global warming.

How hard can it be? You keep claiming post after post it is so. Provide us this crucial testing information.

What difference does it make? I could provide you with 100 links and you wouldn't read them. Even if you did, you'd still keep coming back with the same ridiculous sophistries. See, that's the problem with conspiracy theorists. You're so emotionally invested in your claim, however ridiculous and easily disproven it may be, that it generates a confirmation bias so powerful that you can't even see how wrong you are.

A little bit like a shitfaced asshole insisting he's "Not that drunk" even after everyone else at the party has told him to go lay down.

accurate anology

 

[Cuyo]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

YOU keep claiming it is ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACT. Provide the evidence. It is not my job to prove a negative it is YOUR job to prove YOUR statement that Human caused global warming is occurring. YOU, not I keep claiming it is proven scientific fact. Trot out the science that proves it. Provide us "deniers" the scientific tests that prove man is causing global warming.

How hard can it be? You keep claiming post after post it is so. Provide us this crucial testing information.

OK, dummy.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

There is the address. Physicists explaining the physics of global warming. Far better than a millwright could explain it to you. But you will not read it. Nor will you read anything that might disturb you comfortable alternative universe view of reality.

AGW deniers are some of the most malleable, easily duped jackasses on the planet. It's so sad, so very sad. And since now they have a national voice in the GOP, there's a lot of them.

Damn, my threshold for stupidity is lower than usual tonight.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

YOU keep claiming it is ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACT. Provide the evidence. It is not my job to prove a negative it is YOUR job to prove YOUR statement that Human caused global warming is occurring. YOU, not I keep claiming it is proven scientific fact. Trot out the science that proves it. Provide us "deniers" the scientific tests that prove man is causing global warming.

How hard can it be? You keep claiming post after post it is so. Provide us this crucial testing information.

OK, dummy.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

There is the address. Physicists explaining the physics of global warming. Far better than a millwright could explain it to you. But you will not read it. Nor will you read anything that might disturb you comfortable alternative universe view of reality.

And yet not a SINGLE actual test was done. Go figure.

 

[Trajan]

the science on this is pretty clear. i don't think it requires hysteria, but it does require intelligent response.

That's the problem Jillian, the science does NOT back them up one iota. Everytime they try to blame AGW for a particular event I can go back into the historical record and quite easily find an analog. There currently is no empirical data to support their theory. Instead of using actual records they use computer models that are so poor they can't recreate the weather of 5 days ago with perfect data recording. That is a huge problem. And as stated previously the records they do use have been corrupted. Hansen has been caught repeatedly going back into the historical record and altering the temperature data from over 50 years ago to try and get the US's temp record to conform to the false record he is building.

I agree that there are terrible environmental issues out there, but AGW is not one of them.

Ummm.... No. The science is solid and has been around for decades. They didn't wait for the symptom then assign the cause. They predicted this decades ago. Pretty much everything they've predicted would happen, is happening.

The sad thing is that deniers have even been elevated to the point of being considered worthy of addressing, when they should be acknowledged as the intellectual equivalent of a moon-landing denier.

I am sorry but I cannot agree. one of gores advisers himself was a ice age advocate back in the 70's for instance. there is so much that is not understood, I don't think we can ever really know. Models of the complexity that are called for are still crap shoots.

they said back in the 60's, i clearly remember the commercials that the air would be un- breathable by now, ( like Peking today) one TV ad had a guy wearing a gas mask for god sakes and they were dead serious.

We did isnsuite a clean air and water act, epa etc. BUT the regs they instituted never ever equaled what the 'science' of the day was demanding. and here we are, the air and water is so much better today than then, all with out the end of world restrictions that were called for.


as far as deniers being alike to moon landing deniers, I can't believe you really made that comment seriously, you're way more logical then that.

I don't think many disagree that something is going on, its the severity, ultimate consequence and what to do about it, that's were the lines begin to get drawn and then blur.

 

[Trajan]

RGS, instead of getting beligerant and asking others to do the simple thing of research, why don't you get off you lazy ass and do your own research?

YOU keep claiming it is ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACT. Provide the evidence. It is not my job to prove a negative it is YOUR job to prove YOUR statement that Human caused global warming is occurring. YOU, not I keep claiming it is proven scientific fact. Trot out the science that proves it. Provide us "deniers" the scientific tests that prove man is causing global warming.

How hard can it be? You keep claiming post after post it is so. Provide us this crucial testing information.

What difference does it make? I could provide you with 100 links and you wouldn't read them. Even if you did, you'd still keep coming back with the same ridiculous sophistries. See, that's the problem with conspiracy theorists. You're so emotionally invested in your claim, however ridiculous and easily disproven it may be, that it generates a confirmation bias so powerful that you can't even see how wrong you are.

A little bit like a shitfaced asshole insisting he's "Not that drunk" even after everyone else at the party has told him to go lay down.

wow, I suggest a viewing of the film taken at Copenhagen.

lets start with what they started with...






seriously?