Damn Global Warming...

[Bryce]

http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/6 ... and-Asthma

Temperatures are set to be well below average, with highs of just 3C (37F) in Edinburgh and Aberdeen yesterday, compared to 9C (48F) in Tomsk in Siberia and 8C (46F) in Greenland.

Temperatures in parts of Britain are expected to sink to -5C (23F) in the coming days with further icy gales and snow on the way.

Unseasonable cold weather is expected to last at least until the weekend with some forecasters predicting bitter conditions throughout next month.

[Turkeytop]

You'll notice they don't call it global warming anymore. Now it's "climate change." "Global warming" made it too difficult to explain cold weather events. Climate change covers everything. Snow in June? Climate change. Peach blossoms in February? Climate change. Typhoon in Malaysia? Climate change. The old lady gives you hell for staying out too late? Climate change. You're covered.

[screen glare]

Polar ice caps melting? Climate change. The warmest summer temperatures on record? Climate change. Climate change deniers? Nearly extinct.

[Turkeytop]

Polar ice caps melting? Climate change. The warmest summer temperatures on record? Climate change. Climate change deniers? Nearly extinct.

Oh no, I'm not a denier. Climate change is real. I was simply observing how the lexicon around the issue has changed.

[Marcus]

It's not just warmer weather, it's crazier weather. The damage from Hurricane Sandy to NYC and that part of the eastern seaboard was unusual and a big shock to many. The same can be said about Hurricane Katrina when it hit New Orleans. Outside of Hurricanes look at the California drought, the F 5 tornado that hit Manitoba, Canada + many other extremes. It's happening and it will not get better anytime soon if at all.

[Bryce]

The damage from Hurricane Sandy to NYC and that part of the eastern seaboard was unusual and a big shock to many.

Unusual? Not really...

Colonial Hurricane of 1635--Was a powerful New England hurricane that struck the Massachussetts Bay Colony in 1635 some fifteen years after the Mayflower struck land at Plymouth Rock. This storm had reminded many of the pilgrims and settlers of past hurricanes that struck in the West Indies or Caribbean. Many of the pilgrims believed that this storm was apocalyptic.

1667--The Year Of The Hurricane--At a time when the Mid-Atlantic states of North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland agreed to temporarily halt production of tobacco, a strong hurricane ripped through the Mid-Atlantic region on August 27th. While there was no recorded statistics such as where the storm made landfall, its track, and its forward speed and intensity. It destroyed 80 percent of the tobacco and corn while destroying some 15,000 homes in Virginia and Maryland.

The Great Gust of 1724--According to Rick Schwartz's book, "Hurricanes and the Mid-Atlantic States," two hurricanes brought significant wind and rain to the Mid-Atlantic region in 1724. The first storm moved through the area around August 12th, and caused torrential rains and devastating winds. Less than a week later, another violent storm system came through on August 17th, 18th, and 19th with violent winds and rain. These two systems are among the most significant tropical storms to affect the Mid-Atlantic during the colonial period of the late 1600s and 1700s.

Hurricane of October, 1743--A storm that affected what would become the Northeastern United States and New England, brought gusty winds and rainy conditions as far as Philadelphia, and produced flooding in Boston. Central barometric pressure of the storm was measured to be 29.35 inches of Hg in Boston. This storm, which wasn't particularly powerful, was memorable because it garnered the interest of future patriot and one of the founders of the United States, Benjamin Franklin, who believed the storm was coming in from Boston. However, it was going to Boston. Nevertheless, it began the long educational journey, which would be our understanding of hurricanes.

Hurricane of October, 1749--The storm was perhaps one of the strongest storm ever in the Mid-Atlantic. According to Rick Schwartz, the hurricane produced a H*** tidal surge of 15 feet. Based upon that observation, many experts believe that this system was a Category Four on the Saffir-Simpson Scale. It was responsible for creating Willoughby Spit, a small area of land near Norfolk that was inside the Chesapeake Bay.

The Great Chesapeake Bay Hurricane of 1769--This hurricane plagued the Mid-Atlantic coast from North Carolina up into the Chesapeake over the two days of September 7-8, 1769, and was probably one of the strongest storms in the Mid-Atlantic during the 18th Century. It made landfall near New Bern, North Carolina, and laid that town in ruin as tides rose 12 feet above normal. Most notably, it caused widespread damage to the Stratford Hall plantation, which belonged to the family of famous confederate General Robert E. Lee.

I could continue on and on and on...

Please note, these storms happened before automobiles were emitting carbon.

Outside of Hurricanes look at the California drought,

They've happened before, and will happen again. California is located in the desert. Droughts happen in deserts.

California's current drought is being billed as the driest period in the state's recorded rainfall history. But scientists who study the West's long-term climate patterns say the state has been parched for much longer stretches before that 163-year historical period began.

And they worry that the "megadroughts" typical of California's earlier history could come again.

The acclaimed UCLA historian Norris Hundley cautioned that, “It is a mistake…to think of California in terms of averages and regular cycles of precipitation.” Settlers’ accounts of the area are laden with odd conclusions based on the extreme conditions present at the time of observation. For example: a dry Sonoma was declared entirely unsuitable for agriculture in 1841. The Sacramento Valley was written off as “a barren wasteland.” Much of the Central Valley was just a great “inland sea” during the torrential floods of 1861-1862, when Sacramento could be traversed only by canoe, then drought-stricken two years later in 1864.

To lay these current weather patterns on man made causes is either dishonest or stupid.

[Deleted User 8570]

The damage from Hurricane Sandy to NYC and that part of the eastern seaboard was unusual and a big shock to many.

Unusual? Not really...

Colonial Hurricane of 1635--Was a powerful New England hurricane that struck the Massachussetts Bay Colony in 1635 some fifteen years after the Mayflower struck land at Plymouth Rock. This storm had reminded many of the pilgrims and settlers of past hurricanes that struck in the West Indies or Caribbean. Many of the pilgrims believed that this storm was apocalyptic.

1667--The Year Of The Hurricane--At a time when the Mid-Atlantic states of North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland agreed to temporarily halt production of tobacco, a strong hurricane ripped through the Mid-Atlantic region on August 27th. While there was no recorded statistics such as where the storm made landfall, its track, and its forward speed and intensity. It destroyed 80 percent of the tobacco and corn while destroying some 15,000 homes in Virginia and Maryland.

The Great Gust of 1724--According to Rick Schwartz's book, "Hurricanes and the Mid-Atlantic States," two hurricanes brought significant wind and rain to the Mid-Atlantic region in 1724. The first storm moved through the area around August 12th, and caused torrential rains and devastating winds. Less than a week later, another violent storm system came through on August 17th, 18th, and 19th with violent winds and rain. These two systems are among the most significant tropical storms to affect the Mid-Atlantic during the colonial period of the late 1600s and 1700s.

Hurricane of October, 1743--A storm that affected what would become the Northeastern United States and New England, brought gusty winds and rainy conditions as far as Philadelphia, and produced flooding in Boston. Central barometric pressure of the storm was measured to be 29.35 inches of Hg in Boston. This storm, which wasn't particularly powerful, was memorable because it garnered the interest of future patriot and one of the founders of the United States, Benjamin Franklin, who believed the storm was coming in from Boston. However, it was going to Boston. Nevertheless, it began the long educational journey, which would be our understanding of hurricanes.

Hurricane of October, 1749--The storm was perhaps one of the strongest storm ever in the Mid-Atlantic. According to Rick Schwartz, the hurricane produced a H*** tidal surge of 15 feet. Based upon that observation, many experts believe that this system was a Category Four on the Saffir-Simpson Scale. It was responsible for creating Willoughby Spit, a small area of land near Norfolk that was inside the Chesapeake Bay.

The Great Chesapeake Bay Hurricane of 1769--This hurricane plagued the Mid-Atlantic coast from North Carolina up into the Chesapeake over the two days of September 7-8, 1769, and was probably one of the strongest storms in the Mid-Atlantic during the 18th Century. It made landfall near New Bern, North Carolina, and laid that town in ruin as tides rose 12 feet above normal. Most notably, it caused widespread damage to the Stratford Hall plantation, which belonged to the family of famous confederate General Robert E. Lee.

I could continue on and on and on...

Please note, these storms happened before automobiles were emitting carbon.

Outside of Hurricanes look at the California drought,

They've happened before, and will happen again. California is located in the desert. Droughts happen in deserts.

California's current drought is being billed as the driest period in the state's recorded rainfall history. But scientists who study the West's long-term climate patterns say the state has been parched for much longer stretches before that 163-year historical period began.

And they worry that the "megadroughts" typical of California's earlier history could come again.

The acclaimed UCLA historian Norris Hundley cautioned that, “It is a mistake…to think of California in terms of averages and regular cycles of precipitation.” Settlers’ accounts of the area are laden with odd conclusions based on the extreme conditions present at the time of observation. For example: a dry Sonoma was declared entirely unsuitable for agriculture in 1841. The Sacramento Valley was written off as “a barren wasteland.” Much of the Central Valley was just a great “inland sea” during the torrential floods of 1861-1862, when Sacramento could be traversed only by canoe, then drought-stricken two years later in 1864.

To lay these current weather patterns on man made causes is either dishonest or stupid.

You can't really talk specific weather... It's the big picture... Since we started emitting incredible amounts of carbon there has been a jump in temperatures and nearly every month becomes the global "warmest ever recorded" now. To think that adding CO2 which is a known greenhouse gas (that's not disputed and neither is the greenhouse effect) to the atmosphere and that the temperatures would not increase is either dishonest or stupid.

[Bryce]

nearly every month becomes the global "warmest ever recorded" now. .

Yeah, sure...

The Obama administration's politicized bureaucracies are trying to deceive the world once again, this time claiming, falsely, that July of 2015 was the “warmest on record.” In the real world, it was not even the hottest July since last year, according to the global satellite temperature record, which is considered more reliable and comprehensive than the admittedly manipulated and incomplete data relied upon by NASA and NOAA to make their latest false “warmest on record” pronouncements. Virtually none of the establishment press bothered to mention the caveats on the methodology behind taking the Earth's temperature, preferring instead to parrot official press releases yet again.

Indeed, as has happened in virtually every instance where the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) made a “warmest on record” claim — whether it be over a time span of a year or a month — the agencies' own data contradict the claim. In fact, the global temperature data gathered by NASA's own satellites, the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) data set, along with the satellite data from the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH), make a complete mockery of the latest fear-mongering, just as they did for claims made about last August and the year 2014.

[Deleted User 8570]

nearly every month becomes the global "warmest ever recorded" now. .

Yeah, sure...

The Obama administration's politicized bureaucracies are trying to deceive the world once again, this time claiming, falsely, that July of 2015 was the “warmest on record.” In the real world, it was not even the hottest July since last year, according to the global satellite temperature record, which is considered more reliable and comprehensive than the admittedly manipulated and incomplete data relied upon by NASA and NOAA to make their latest false “warmest on record” pronouncements. Virtually none of the establishment press bothered to mention the caveats on the methodology behind taking the Earth's temperature, preferring instead to parrot official press releases yet again.

Indeed, as has happened in virtually every instance where the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) made a “warmest on record” claim — whether it be over a time span of a year or a month — the agencies' own data contradict the claim. In fact, the global temperature data gathered by NASA's own satellites, the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) data set, along with the satellite data from the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH), make a complete mockery of the latest fear-mongering, just as they did for claims made about last August and the year 2014.

Do you have a source? That seems a bit (I'm being really freakin nice) slanted...

[Bryce]

nearly every month becomes the global "warmest ever recorded" now. .

Yeah, sure...

The Obama administration's politicized bureaucracies are trying to deceive the world once again, this time claiming, falsely, that July of 2015 was the “warmest on record.” In the real world, it was not even the hottest July since last year, according to the global satellite temperature record, which is considered more reliable and comprehensive than the admittedly manipulated and incomplete data relied upon by NASA and NOAA to make their latest false “warmest on record” pronouncements. Virtually none of the establishment press bothered to mention the caveats on the methodology behind taking the Earth's temperature, preferring instead to parrot official press releases yet again.

Indeed, as has happened in virtually every instance where the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) made a “warmest on record” claim — whether it be over a time span of a year or a month — the agencies' own data contradict the claim. In fact, the global temperature data gathered by NASA's own satellites, the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) data set, along with the satellite data from the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH), make a complete mockery of the latest fear-mongering, just as they did for claims made about last August and the year 2014.

Do you have a source? That seems a bit (I'm being really freakin nice) slanted...

Slanted? Just like the now debunked hockey stick graph?

[bmw]

Oh no, not another global warming debate. These are almost as useless as gun control debates.

I've pretty much settled on this stance:

Is the earth getting warmer? Probably.
Is man contributing to the earth getting warmer? Probably.
Do we know how much man is contributing to the earth getting warmer? No.
Do we know how much natural phenomenon are contributing to the earth getting warmer. Not really.
Will the earth again someday start getting colder? Probably.
Is there any policy that the US can implement that will effectively curb global warning? No.

Is Michigan cold for this time of year? YES.
Have I had enough cold Michigan winters and springs? YES.

[Bryce]

Oh no, not another global warming debate. These are almost as useless as gun control debates.

I don't think I can disagree much on your listed points.

What makes the debate important is that there are government folks that are attempting to make those that have the temerity to be a sceptic to face criminal charges.

[bmw]

I'm all for cleaner water and cleaner air, and I think most people would agree that cleaner air and cleaner water are a good thing and that reasonable government regulations should be in place to ensure cleaner air and cleaner water. So why don't those on the left argue their agenda on those merits rather than making it about climate change and using doomsday tactics?

[Deleted User 8570]

I'm all for cleaner water and cleaner air, and I think most people would agree that cleaner air and cleaner water are a good thing and that reasonable government regulations should be in place to ensure cleaner air and cleaner water. So why don't those on the left argue their agenda on those merits rather than making it about climate change and using doomsday tactics?

The above poster would not agree that we need cleaner air and water via regulation.

[craig11152]

Oh no, not another global warming debate. These are almost as useless as gun control debates.

I've pretty much settled on this stance:

Is the earth getting warmer? Probably.
Is man contributing to the earth getting warmer? Probably.
Do we know how much man is contributing to the earth getting warmer? No.
Do we know how much natural phenomenon are contributing to the earth getting warmer. Not really.
Will the earth again someday start getting colder? Probably.
Is there any policy that the US can implement that will effectively curb global warning? No.

This sums me up well. The thing I would add is simply that man made impact and natural impact are not mutually exclusive concepts. They both occur at the same time. When they are in sink temperatures rise quickly. When they are at odds which ever direction the temperature is going is being mitigated.