United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: ABC News: Record Cold Caused By Global Warming
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://lonelyconservative.com/2011/ ... cold-caused-by-global-warming/
Published: Jan 27, 2011
Author: lonely conservative
Post Date: 2011-01-27 14:25:04 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 31917
Comments: 54
Last night when I left work I trudged the five or so blocks to my car as the icy wind cut through my pants and chilled me to the bone. When I got home I turned on the local news to check the forecast, and forgot to turn it off before World News Tonight came on. I was flabbergasted when I heard them tell me that the record cold across the country is due to global warming. I checked the ABC News site and I can’t find the segment about global warming, but I know I’m not the only one who saw it. Record Cold Is “Global Warming”! There is no end of madness and doublespeak in media today. ABC’s World News actually said today that the reason our winter is so severely cold is “global warming”. That’s right: they actually said that it is COLDER because of global WARMING. There are words for assertions like that: “madness”, “insanity”, “lies”, and “garbage” are among them. How true. I’ll keep searching for the footage and update if I find it.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 14.
#2. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
A theory is scientific only in so far as it is falsifiable, and should be given up as soon as it is falsified -- Karl Popper. So, let's see... If it's hot, the cause is global warming. If it's cold, the cause is global warming. If it's dry, the cause is global warming. If it's wet, the cause is global warming. Global warming apparently is not falsifiable because no matter what the evidence is, global warming is the cause. So it's not a science. It's a belief system. And it should be given up.
Nicely stated.
When my dad was a kid, growing up on a farm during the Great Depression, his mom use to tell him that thunder and lightening was the result of god being angry. It seems to me that many people today believe in the same sort of myths. They've simply substituted global warming for an angry god.
People used to believe that the world was flat and that diseases were caused by gremlins living in your stomach. Today, people believe that Obama was born in Kenya, that the government pulled of 9/11, and that global warming is a hoax.
I just got done watching another interview with Patrick Moore on Fox Business. He co-founded Greenpeace and left a couple of decades later because it was taken over by anti-capitalist radicals, who have little to no science education. Moore has a PhD in Ecology. He unequivocally states that we do not have enough information to know what causes climate change. What he does know is that the climate has changed for millions of years before there were any humans. He also believes that a little warming is beneficial and certainly better than cooling, which would threaten the food supply. Something I didn't know -- two new nuclear power plants will start construction in Georgia this year. They will go online by 2016. He also said it takes 8 years to get a plant operational under current regulations -- 4 years to plan and 4 years to construct. That's not bad, but China does it in 6 years. He is a deep skeptic about "clean coal". He says that Germany is trying it and it's not working because there are few places to safely pump enormous amounts of CO2 into the ground, which might interfere with water supplies. He also doesn't believe that wind and solar power can supply us with all of the energy we need because of the variability of the sun and wind. What he advocates is that as our aging coal plants go offline at the end of the useful life, they should be replaced with nuclear plants. This realistically will take 30 to 50 years. At that time, 90% of the pollution we emit would be gone (assuming we also convert to plug-in electrics and fuel cells for transportation). This is a guy we should be listening to. He's an environmentalist. He's a scientist. He's a realist.
He's certainly welcome to his beliefs, and there are many who share those beliefs, but roughly 97% of climate scientists disagree. Look, I can find doctors who argue that vaccines will poison you, that you should never treat cancer with chemo, and that root canals will make you sick. That doesn't mean they are correct. Heck, Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman argues that cutting spending now is a mistake, so does that mean you believe him? The facts are pretty clear - since the 1970's global temperatures have risen at a faster rate than at any previous time in history, and the rise correlates perfectly with rising atmospheric CO2 levels. And based on isotope analysis, we know that CO2 is rising due to human activity. Only a rare few will dispute that, and most instead resort to "it's all a conspiracy" arguments. What there is much disagreement on is the continued rate of change, and the impact of such change, but as we see predicted events such as mega-storms, severe droughts, heatwaves, etc., becoming commonplace, I expect further consensus on the impact of a warming planet.
#16. To: go65 (#14)
Look, I can find doctors who argue that vaccines will poison you, that you should never treat cancer with chemo, and that root canals will make you sick. That doesn't mean they are correct. Heck, Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman argues that cutting spending now is a mistake, so does that mean you believe him? The facts are pretty clear - since the 1970's global temperatures have risen at a faster rate than at any previous time in history, and the rise correlates perfectly with rising atmospheric CO2 levels. And based on isotope analysis, we know that CO2 is rising due to human activity. Only a rare few will dispute that, and most instead resort to "it's all a conspiracy" arguments. What there is much disagreement on is the continued rate of change, and the impact of such change, but as we see predicted events such as mega-storms, severe droughts, heatwaves, etc., becoming commonplace, I expect further consensus on the impact of a warming planet. You hype your agenda, because you're incapable of original thought. The REAL question is, how signficant is your "warming" in the grand scheme of things??? Hmmm... It seems that it means precisely dick. Also, since the "global warming" has been happening since the 1700's, perhaps you can explain to me how the SUVs, aerosol cans, air-conditioning refrigerant, etc., started the trend...? Oh, that's right, none of that shit EXISTED back then.... Oh, and the population was a lot SMALLER than it is today, so it's not caused by MAN... Indeed they are.
"climate scientists" but NOT astro-physicists or geologists. That's the point. "Climate scientists" are working in a corrupt system guided by politics not science, so they can't be trusted.
"Climate scientists" but NOT astro-physicists or geologists. That's the point. "Climate scientists" are working in a corrupt system guided by politics rather than science, so they can't be trusted. The vast majority of astro-physicists and geologists say that the climatologists are out to lunch.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#3. To: jwpegler (#2)
#4. To: Capitalist Eric, go65 (#3)
#8. To: jwpegler (#4)
It seems to me that many people today believe in the same sort of myths. They've simply substituted global warming for an angry god.
#9. To: go65 (#8)
(Edited)
and that global warming is a hoax
#14. To: jwpegler (#9)
(Edited)
He unequivocally states that we do not have enough information to know what causes climate change. What he does know is that the climate has changed for millions of years before there were any humans. He also believes that a little warming is beneficial and certainly better than cooling, which would threaten the food supply.
Replies to Comment # 14. He's certainly welcome to his beliefs, and there are many who share those beliefs, but roughly 97% of climate scientists disagree.
What BULLSHIT.
...The facts are pretty clear ...
#33. To: go65 (#14)
roughly 97% of climate scientists disagree
#34. To: go65 (#14)
roughly 97% of climate scientists disagree
End Trace Mode for Comment # 14.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]