Arctic ice defines the homelands and cultures of indigenous peoples and ecosystems that harbor species which are uniquely adapted to this environment.
Isn't that why everyone quotes Darwin? Evolution of the species. One dies another thrives. How they can project those kinds of cost figures is beyond belief. We need to trap that methane and build big generation plants to use the resource. Ice free would make transport of large quantities of oil much less expensive. If their figures are accurate the US better get some bigger printing presses to chunk out more funny money.
PS The Eskimos are not indigenous. They are Mongols that walked across the land bridge a few 1000 years ago at most. Unless they are descended from seals or walruses.
Darwin is always misquoted like that. What he concluded was that "sharing of resources is the natural state of things". Darwin was all about cooperation.
I see very little cooperation in the world. Seems to all be motivated by greed. Whether the warmers getting in on the carbon credit business or the oil people protecting their interest. I think a close look at Copenhagen is in order to see really how much divides US from the rest of the World. The 3rd World went their with their hands out looking for loot to fill the pockets of the greedy politicians in the various countries. Who were they trying to kid. Then all the idiots in the streets. What a bunch of LOSERS.
I think Darwin was an idealist if he really believed there was sharing in nature. nature is as brutal as Wall Street. Little room for mercy. Symbiosis is highly over rated.
your above post reminded me of the guy who was bitten by sharks a couple days ago, off the coast of Florida. He knew better than going out there by himself swimming alone - but he did it anyway. Ouch, he died at the hospital. A lifeguard swam out there, the guy's hand was knawed all up...he was trying ta fend off the sharks with his hand. :sick:
A lot of people act just like sharks. It's been that way for thousands of years. And Hitler was supposedly on 28 different drugs at one time. He killed himself one day after marrying his mistress.
Humm...A.Gore's GW image just entered my noggin. For some uncanny, funky reason. :shades:
RFK, Jr. 15 months ago: Global warming means no snow or cold in DC
By: David Freddoso Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who flies around on private planes so as to tell larger numbers of people how they must live their lives in order to save the planet, wrote a column last year on the lack of winter weather in Washington, D.C.
In Virginia, the weather also has changed dramatically. Recently arrived residents in the northern suburbs, accustomed to today's anemic winters, might find it astonishing to learn that there were once ski runs on Ballantrae Hill in McLean, with a rope tow and local ski club. Snow is so scarce today that most Virginia children probably don't own a sled. But neighbors came to our home at Hickory Hill nearly every winter weekend to ride saucers and Flexible Flyers.
In those days, I recall my uncle, President Kennedy, standing erect as he rode a toboggan in his top coat, never faltering until he slid into the boxwood at the bottom of the hill. Once, my father, Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, brought a delegation of visiting Eskimos home from the Justice Department for lunch at our house. They spent the afternoon building a great igloo in the deep snow in our backyard. My brothers and sisters played in the structure for several weeks before it began to melt. On weekend afternoons, we commonly joined hundreds of Georgetown residents for ice skating on Washington's C&O Canal, which these days rarely freezes enough to safely skate.
Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil and its carbon cronies continue to pour money into think tanks whose purpose is to deceive the American public into believing that global warming is a fantasy.
Having shoveled my walk five times in the midst of this past weekend's extreme cold and blizzard, I think perhaps RFK, Jr. should leave weather analysis to the meteorologists instead of trying to attribute every global phenomenon to anthropogenic climate change.
We are still early on in the process of discovery. I am not in a panic about this.
Then you are with most of us here in saying it does not deserve the attention of the U.S. president, and the meetings of world leaders in Copenhagen, to use a theory "early on in the process" as the basis for changing the world economy.
The president and U.S. leaders have much more serious and concrete risks they could deal with - nuclear weapons control (I'm talking about the chance of false readings leading to accidental launches, especially from Russia), the next super-flu (near-miss this year), expanding our capability to protect the Earth from comets/asteroids (we have a 2-3 day warning if one approaches from the Sun's direction which is a blind-spot). These are issues that can breakdown civilization within in a year. Instead we have the scientific focus on a weakly proven theory that the climate change we see is not normal, and that we could have to slowly relocate people over the years (which has happened throughout history, before man began producing more than a whisper of CO2). The study of the climate can be funded, just like the study of comets, sea-lions, tectonic plates, volcanos, get better mpg engines ...
We can continue to improve our environment - we can look for economical clean ways for the entire world to burn coal; as it does no good for the world for the U.S. to figure out a way to sequester CO2 if the technology cost is something too expensive for most of the world to implement. Remember in most of the world they are struggling to get the funds to build the coal-plant, and buy their first appliances to run. The developing world is not thinking about spending 2X for each coal plant, so that they can store CO2 underground.
Let's see where this falls on the Liar or Maroon scale. I would say RFK JR. was definitely more maroon.
The snow comes less than two months after a Dec. 19 storm dumped more than 16 inches (40 centimeters) on Washington. According to the National Weather Service, Washington has received more than a foot of snow only 13 times since 1870.
Oh, but the Kennedy's had snow on demand for those times that JFK and RFK wanted to play out in it. Or if they happened to have a group of Eskimos in DC wanting to build an igloo. Of course all the Alaskan Eskimos I know in the 9 villages I serviced, got real defensive if you insinuated they may have lived in an igloo. Igloo is pretty much a white man myth. More likely to be associated with the ancient Canadian Inuits.
I hope RFK jr is out playing in the snow that he lamented passing away with AGW.
PS Anyway you spell it RFK Jr. is a MORON. As is Patrick Kennedy.
"sharing of resources is the natural state of things".
Surely that is not a broad sweeping explanation of the species of life. It surely does not cover the territorial actions of many animals in terms of food and mating (male-lions, bears ...)
So maybe the quotes are taken out of context, hmm? or are they only applicable to some species?
Hey keep your spirits up as you dig out. I know you're getting more snow on Wed.
But all of us whether shivering in Asia, Europe or all across North America - just remember that the weather may be cold, but the scientists say the climate is warming somewhere else. :P
Maybe the Kennedy's will be able to build their igloos again; just don't go putting any windmills up where it would ruin their scenic vistas. :P
Their proof on this subject consists of the fact that some high school kid may have mentioned this possibility in a rough draft of a report on weather myths.
It is kind of ironic because any proof that they have about almost anything is actually "man made".
Covered in snow, they are useless, even on a bright day.
Covered in ice only? Not sure.
But the colder climate areas are not best for having solar panels anyway. The sun is at too low an angle most winter days to allow good production. There are a lot of sunny, warmer areas in this country, and that's where the solar panels can do best.
From a New York Times story:
For homeowners, the upkeep of their power sources can also be a bother. Mr. Stankevitz keeps his panels tilted 40 degrees or higher, but they still become covered with snow — and experts say that if even one cell in a panel is covered, the panel will not produce power. On the other hand, the panels can get extra power from sunlight reflected off nearby snow. And like other electronic gear, solar panels work better when cold. Mr. Stankevitz said that on some rare winter days, when the Minnesota sky is clear, the weather is freezing and the sun is shining brightly, his panels can briefly churn out more electricity than they were designed to produce, more than on the balmiest days of summer.
Generating so far (calculated out to a monthly rate) about $96 of electricity per month. My lease payment is $38 a month. On the plus side for now.
Actually, since my panels went online, I have not had a single "100% sunny" day yet. El Nino has given us some sort of daily cloud cover for the last 11+ days.
After it gets back to our regular Phoenix sun, I might have some REALLY productive days.
Does that article point out what Mr. Stankevitz uses for heat when it's not that rare day, or any given winter night? oil? or some other carbon-based fuel?
Being in NH, I think I'd try a windmill. Phoenix is pretty unique in that it gets so much sun. Last summer we were lucky if 1/3 of the daylight hours were sunny. Overcast was the norm for where I lived in PA, and overcast is the norm here. Solarpowered cars would not be much use here.
Did you guys the dangers of natural gas the other day? A new natural-gas power-plant blew up during the final days of construction in CT. That's one thing at least that heating-oil and coal have going for them. They're relatively safe.
Let's all thank nature for providing this welcome respite from MMGW. In order to make it thru what will probably be one of the hottest years on record, let's all just hope that a few more snow storms dump on DC.
I wonder if we plot the snowfall totals for many of the areas of the country if we would get a hockey-stick shape? :P
I heard on ABC News tonight that even the snowplows in MD were ordered off the roads. So warm their tires were melting?
Snowiest on record for DC and Baltimore. Just like some of the warmites (other than RFK, Jr.) predicted. More weather extremes, more often.
My sister in Virginia got her Forester stuck in her driveway this week. Twice.
Meanwhile El Nino is killing Vancouver, and my wife did a couple of hours of yard work earlier this week. Had to get my heat pump guy out today for a burnt out compressor motor and last month was so mild, he's hurting for receivables.
Hey, if you don't like the snow, you can always go to Rio. (Yahoo)
which taught that people could be made to believe through constant propoganda - if it's in the media and the government tells you something then it is true? So if glaciers started forming in DC, and our government scientists declare "that is proof of warming!", then it is so?
You really need to understand the brilliance of these policymakers jumping on this issue, which is a premature theory. Whichever way the climate or the weather is going, can be used as proof that they are correct! Brilliant in a twisted way!!
BTW - our local nuke plant which has had numerous life-extensions beyond its origianl retirement date - Vermont Yankee - apparently is leaking Tritium into the groundwater, and then into a river. The news stations ran out, took some video of the river running, and now the whole area is upset about tritium, which very few people understand, or care to understand how much could be in the river. People are reacting to the newscasters and people's opinions at Walmart; sort of scaring each other like they do on that Ghost Hunters show on SyFy. (I think Vermont Yankee has more serious potential issues than that, and should be shut for those reasons).
Funny you mention that - I'm actually thinking of going to Carnival next year. Since I got a HD TV a few years ago, it's inspired me to travel more and see the sights and festivals, before I hit the golden years. In a few weeks I'm going to Mexico to get out of the cold.
What that report shows is the difference between deaths from a heat-wave and a very cold snap. I'm guessing without these elderly people who passed-away didn't have AC, and that there were many other people without AC. Only the elderly (very weakest?) passed away. Well with the cold, if you don't have heat, people of all ages die, not just the elderly.
I'd like you and others to make a guess on the following. If you take away fossil fuels of all sorts (that create CO2) from people north of the Mason Dixon line, what do you think the fatality rate will be over the winter? Do you think it will be 32 elderly? 200? I'd say the Earth is too cold; let it warm.
" If you take away fossil fuels of all sorts (that create CO2) from people north of the Mason Dixon line, what do you think the fatality rate will be over the winter? Do you think it will be 32 elderly? 200?"
another way to think of it is to ask how many kids could have been saved had we deployed the resources on global warming somewhere else, more productive?
is our enjoyment of viewing the ice caps really that much more important than a kid's life?
"Climate scientists say that no individual episode of severe weather can be attributed to global climate trends, though there is evidence that such events will probably become more frequent as global temperatures rise."
The media seems to be making a big deal over the fact that there is not much snow in Vancouver. Vancouver only gets about 19 inches of snow per year and less than 4 inches of that falls in February. More falls in the nearby mountains of course. This year seems about average.
RIO DE JANEIRO (AFP) – The worst heatwave to hit Rio de Janeiro in 50 years turned the city into a pre-Carnival furnace Wednesday, and killed 32 elderly people further south, officials said.
According to the Inmet national weather service, recorded temperatures in Rio were well above 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees) -- and felt more like above 50 degrees.
"The heatwave in Rio is seen as historic. February right now is the hottest month for the past 50 years," meteorologist Giovanni Dolif told the O Globo daily.
On Monday and Tuesday, the scalding conditions proved deadly for 32 elderly residents in Santos, a city close to Sao Paulo and 350 kilometers (220 miles) south of Rio.
Half of them succumbed in their homes and the other half died as they sought help in clinics, a spokeswoman for the city's health service told AFP.
The heatwave made Rio the hottest place on the planet on Tuesday, save for Ada, a town in eastern Ghana, according to data from the World Meteorological Organization.
Rio's recorded temperature that day was 46.3 degrees Celsius -- less than even the Sahara desert, which came in at a milder 33 degrees.
Dolif said being in Rio was worse than being in a dry desert because seaside humidity gave the temperature a suffocating boost, making it feel much higher.
El Nino, the phenomenon in which unusually hot Pacific Ocean waters disrupt weather patterns, was blamed for the heatwave by preventing the formation of clouds.
Rio's heatwave was forecast to continue into the weekend, when the city's famous four-day Carnival starts.
Sapped residents in the city have taken to going to the beaches at night to seek a respite from the heat.
Doctors were recommending cold showers and lots of liquids to mitigate the risks of heat exhaustion and dehydration.
It could turn out to be an average winter for Whistler, but the timing of the snowfall before now has been bad.
Bogus is doing fine with their snowpack, but it's pretty thin skiing over in Big Sky Montana and at Grand Targhee. Don't know about the Washington/Oregon resorts, but El Nino may be hurting them.
Yeah, I know. That is all part of the lessons they learned from the snake oil salesmen of the old west. Heads I win, tails you lose. People keep falling for it.
That is also why those "send me $200. and I will send you back $2 million" letters from Nigeria continue to work.
Huh, 46C in Rio, that's just about 115F according to my calculator. All time record, huh? I'm surprised that the all-time record for Rio wasn't higher than for Canada.
"115 degrees is the hottest temperature ever recorded in Canada at Gleichen, Alberta on July 28, 1903."
Imagine that 115F in Canada, over 100 years ago. And that was even before all this GW hockey-stick from the adjusted data. I wonder what could have caused that? Geez with all this GW I'd think Canada would have posted some 120F's by now, and Rio would be hotter than that.
So what we can conclude from all this is that there are and have been weather extremes, even where you wouldn't expect them. It does nothing to prove GW, never mind if man is significantly involved.
Summary: the climate may be shifting a little; can't tell because the IPCC has made the data collection and evaluation illegitimate by apparent bias and prejudice. But we can see from weather that the weather is not much different then it was around the world years ago. There is change, as there always has been change, but this change is overblown.
Well, we all know that regardless of the effects (or not) of man on the global climate, there will ALWAYS be heat waves, cold snaps, ice storms at odd times, tornadoes outside of tornado season, etc etc.
Weather is by nature (pun intended) unpredictable.
Even if every global climate scientist on the planet wrote a paper on titled "MAN IS DEFINITELY MAKING THE EARTH WARMER" there will still be odd and unusual weather events- 100 year floods - 100 year snow storms etc etc.
We learn nothing by talking about "man, it sure is cold in the Northeast USA right now" or "man, it sure is hot in Rio right now."
High temp records, Cold temp records, Snow storms, heat waves, etc: None of that matters in regard to whether the Earf is warming due to man's activity.
High temp records, Cold temp records, Snow storms, heat waves, etc: None of that matters in regard to whether the Earf is warming due to man's activity.
None of that matters in regard to whether the Earf is warming due to man's activity.
Sure it matters. Don't climatologists take weather data to determine the climate? How can you determine the climate temperature, if you don't use the weather temperatures every day from around the world over a period of years? If it isn't weather data that's being used, what do they use? are you claiming their claims are totally bogus?
Sure, the temps matter. But you gotta ignore the high and low extremes, because they "cancel" one another out, and always will.
It's TRENDS that matter. 10 consecutive "hotter than the average" summers matters, as would 10 consecutive "colder than average" winters.
But a day with an all-time low temp for Smuckatelli, Idaho? Doesn't matter. Just like a day with an all-time high temp for Smuckatelli, Idaho would also not matter.
When I say "they wouldn't matter" I mean in the search for whether or not the Earf is warming due to man's activity they wouldn't matter. A record high temp and a record low temp will ALWAYS OCCUR regardless of what man is or is not doing to the climate.
But a day with an all-time low temp for Smuckatelli, Idaho? Doesn't matter. Just like a day with an all-time high temp for Smuckatelli, Idaho would also not matter
Now you have managed to marginalize and alienate all the folks in Smuckatgelli, Idaho. :shades:
Sure, the temps matter. But you gotta ignore the high and low extremes, because they "cancel" one another out, and always will.
No you don't throw scientific data out in an analysis, if there is not a flaw in the data! The data will probably fall in a normal distribution - Bell Curve, and you would distort that ruining any calculation of standard deviations. You would falsely calcualte less variability than actually occurs. Is this why climatologists now think there are more weather extreme than normal? :P This would be like discounting dwarves and giants from height-studies, and then tomorrow when a giant is found, reporting "aha, a giant, that's proof of genetic extremes occurring".
You're trying to argue that the world is getting hotter on average - climate. People are using stories like that in Rio to say - there's proof of GW. I then say, that's not proof it was the same temperature 100 years ago IN CANADA, of all places.
Are you REALLY not understanding what I'm saying, or are you just trying to be argumentative?
Whomever these "people" are who are "trying to say the Rio heat wave is proof of Global Warming" are JUST AS WRONG as anyone who tries to say "two feet of snow in Washington DC in the WINTER means Global Warming is Hooey."
Neither one ( of those statements ) is true.
A single cold snap and/or heat wave, ALONE, does not affect "global climate" data any more than it being cold for a few summer days or hot for a few winter days in Smuckatelli, Idaho.
Just like "because it was 115 degrees in Canada 100 years ago, Global Warming is hooey" is completely untrue.
marginalize and alienate all the folks in Smuckatgelli, Idaho
My phone here in Boise has been ringing off the wall ever since Larsb posted that. Good elk sausage up that way.
And temp extremes may indicate global warming as those links I've been posting here for months now say. One by itself may not mean anything other than weather, but when they keep piling up, you have to wonder if global warming is having an affect (like the prediction that we'll have more moisture and thus more floods and snow events).
You misinterpret me. First I'm mentioning the snowstorms in DC because I'm making comment on the fact that it still seems plenty cold and we could use some more warming. And I mention the temperature record in Canada to prove that the temperature in Rio is not that abnormal.
I'm not trying to prove 1) that the climate is warming, 2) that if the climate is warming that man is a major contributor, and 3) that warming is a net negative for the globe and not a positive.
I am pointing out potential flaws in 1) the way data is collected versus years ago and when that's comparing apples and oranges, 2) other flaws in how data is collected, 3) who's handling the data and whether they are unbiased, 4) the release of the e-mails which strongly indicates data is being changed by the IPCC, due to bias, 5) the political and other hacks who stand to make a lot of $ by having the IPCC theory being stated as close to fact, 6) pointing out that it would be good if the average temperature increased on good old planet Earth - my point about less fuel would be burnt to keep warm, and 7) how it just seems so convenient that no matter what happens in the climate or in the weather, it is now disseminated thru the media that this is now attributed to MMGW.
I'm not the one who several years ago when there were a few extra hurricanes (weather) got on the major news channels and said this is attributable to GW. I'm not the one who put out a report falsely claiming the glaciers in the Himalayas would be melted by 2035 due to the GW being fed by man emitting CO2. If someone unfairly picks up a stick to hit me, I'm also going to pick up a stick.
This whole subject isn't science anymore. It's a witch-doctor using the rumbling volcano to control - when it rumbles he the people they must repent and change their ways; if the volcano is quiet, he takes credit. No matter which way the volcano goes, he uses it. You believe the witch-doctor; he tells you the villagers affect the volcano, I say sure we stop on the ground and vibrate it a little, but that really doesn't matter.
You want to believe in the witchdoctors telling you that we control this naturally occurring systems, and are a big influence. You're impressed by the witchdoctors title and the chief telling you the witchdoctor has great knowledge. I want proof, other then the scientific knowledge that when we walk we vibrate the ground very slightly.
One by itself may not mean anything other than weather, but when they keep piling up, you have to wonder if global warming is having an affect (like the prediction that we'll have more moisture and thus more floods and snow events).
Or do we just now have more weather stations, more people who report into the TV stations, and better communication technology? Years ago when people relied on their hometown newspaper, did they carry every story like you can go find today on the web? Would the Rio story have made the Smuckatgelli gazette?
" If someone unfairly picks up a stick to hit me, I'm also going to pick up a stick. "
larsb's point, which is a valid one, is that it is wrong for the warmers to point to extreme summer heat as proof of their cause, and it is equally wrong of the anti-warmers to point to the extreme winter snow as a proof of their cause too.
Comments
Isn't that why everyone quotes Darwin? Evolution of the species. One dies another thrives. How they can project those kinds of cost figures is beyond belief. We need to trap that methane and build big generation plants to use the resource. Ice free would make transport of large quantities of oil much less expensive. If their figures are accurate the US better get some bigger printing presses to chunk out more funny money.
PS
The Eskimos are not indigenous. They are Mongols that walked across the land bridge a few 1000 years ago at most. Unless they are descended from seals or walruses.
Darwin is always misquoted like that. What he concluded was that "sharing of resources is the natural state of things". Darwin was all about cooperation.
scientificblogging.com
(I didn't check to see who funded them either
I think Darwin was an idealist if he really believed there was sharing in nature. nature is as brutal as Wall Street. Little room for mercy. Symbiosis is highly over rated.
A lot of people act just like sharks. It's been that way for thousands of years. And Hitler was supposedly on 28 different drugs at one time. He killed himself one day after marrying his mistress.
Humm...A.Gore's GW image just entered my noggin. For some uncanny, funky reason. :shades:
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
By: David Freddoso
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who flies around on private planes so as to tell larger numbers of people how they must live their lives in order to save the planet, wrote a column last year on the lack of winter weather in Washington, D.C.
In Virginia, the weather also has changed dramatically. Recently arrived residents in the northern suburbs, accustomed to today's anemic winters, might find it astonishing to learn that there were once ski runs on Ballantrae Hill in McLean, with a rope tow and local ski club. Snow is so scarce today that most Virginia children probably don't own a sled. But neighbors came to our home at Hickory Hill nearly every winter weekend to ride saucers and Flexible Flyers.
In those days, I recall my uncle, President Kennedy, standing erect as he rode a toboggan in his top coat, never faltering until he slid into the boxwood at the bottom of the hill. Once, my father, Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy, brought a delegation of visiting Eskimos home from the Justice Department for lunch at our house. They spent the afternoon building a great igloo in the deep snow in our backyard. My brothers and sisters played in the structure for several weeks before it began to melt. On weekend afternoons, we commonly joined hundreds of Georgetown residents for ice skating on Washington's C&O Canal, which these days rarely freezes enough to safely skate.
Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil and its carbon cronies continue to pour money into think tanks whose purpose is to deceive the American public into believing that global warming is a fantasy.
Having shoveled my walk five times in the midst of this past weekend's extreme cold and blizzard, I think perhaps RFK, Jr. should leave weather analysis to the meteorologists instead of trying to attribute every global phenomenon to anthropogenic climate change.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/RFK-7983405- 7.html
Then you are with most of us here in saying it does not deserve the attention of the U.S. president, and the meetings of world leaders in Copenhagen, to use a theory "early on in the process" as the basis for changing the world economy.
The president and U.S. leaders have much more serious and concrete risks they could deal with - nuclear weapons control (I'm talking about the chance of false readings leading to accidental launches, especially from Russia), the next super-flu (near-miss this year), expanding our capability to protect the Earth from comets/asteroids (we have a 2-3 day warning if one approaches from the Sun's direction which is a blind-spot). These are issues that can breakdown civilization within in a year. Instead we have the scientific focus on a weakly proven theory that the climate change we see is not normal, and that we could have to slowly relocate people over the years (which has happened throughout history, before man began producing more than a whisper of CO2).
The study of the climate can be funded, just like the study of comets, sea-lions, tectonic plates, volcanos, get better mpg engines ...
We can continue to improve our environment - we can look for economical clean ways for the entire world to burn coal; as it does no good for the world for the U.S. to figure out a way to sequester CO2 if the technology cost is something too expensive for most of the world to implement. Remember in most of the world they are struggling to get the funds to build the coal-plant, and buy their first appliances to run. The developing world is not thinking about spending 2X for each coal plant, so that they can store CO2 underground.
The snow comes less than two months after a Dec. 19 storm dumped more than 16 inches (40 centimeters) on Washington. According to the National Weather Service, Washington has received more than a foot of snow only 13 times since 1870.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/storms/winter/2010-02-07-snow-sunday_N.htm
I hope RFK jr is out playing in the snow that he lamented passing away with AGW.
PS
Anyway you spell it RFK Jr. is a MORON. As is Patrick Kennedy.
Surely that is not a broad sweeping explanation of the species of life. It surely does not cover the territorial actions of many animals in terms of food and mating (male-lions, bears ...)
So maybe the quotes are taken out of context, hmm? or are they only applicable to some species?
Herbert Spencer was the guy who came up with "survival of the fittest". I think Darwin just latched onto it as shorthand and to help sell books.
Spencer said "In science the important thing is to modify and change one's ideas as science advances".
So keep those studies going.
But all of us whether shivering in Asia, Europe or all across North America - just remember that the weather may be cold, but the scientists say the climate is warming somewhere else. :P
Maybe the Kennedy's will be able to build their igloos again; just don't go putting any windmills up where it would ruin their scenic vistas. :P
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100208/us_nm/us_weather_usa
Notice that oil prices went up because of this weather. How much heating oil do you think this cold weather causes us to burn?
How would solar panels do on a cloudy day, with 2' of snow and ice on them?
It is kind of ironic because any proof that they have about almost anything is actually "man made".
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Covered in ice only? Not sure.
But the colder climate areas are not best for having solar panels anyway. The sun is at too low an angle most winter days to allow good production. There are a lot of sunny, warmer areas in this country, and that's where the solar panels can do best.
From a New York Times story:
For homeowners, the upkeep of their power sources can also be a bother.
Mr. Stankevitz keeps his panels tilted 40 degrees or higher, but they still become covered with snow — and experts say that if even one cell in a panel is covered, the panel will not produce power. On the other hand, the panels can get extra power from sunlight reflected off nearby snow. And like other electronic gear, solar panels work better when cold. Mr. Stankevitz said that on some rare winter days, when the Minnesota sky is clear, the weather is freezing and the sun is shining brightly, his panels can briefly churn out more electricity than they were designed to produce, more than on the balmiest days of summer.
Well I learned something today. How are yours working out? Got a dollar value yet on monthly savings?
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Actually, since my panels went online, I have not had a single "100% sunny" day yet. El Nino has given us some sort of daily cloud cover for the last 11+ days.
After it gets back to our regular Phoenix sun, I might have some REALLY productive days.
Being in NH, I think I'd try a windmill. Phoenix is pretty unique in that it gets so much sun. Last summer we were lucky if 1/3 of the daylight hours were sunny. Overcast was the norm for where I lived in PA, and overcast is the norm here. Solarpowered cars would not be much use here.
Did you guys the dangers of natural gas the other day? A new natural-gas power-plant blew up during the final days of construction in CT. That's one thing at least that heating-oil and coal have going for them. They're relatively safe.
I wonder if we plot the snowfall totals for many of the areas of the country if we would get a hockey-stick shape? :P
I heard on ABC News tonight that even the snowplows in MD were ordered off the roads. So warm their tires were melting?
My sister in Virginia got her Forester stuck in her driveway this week. Twice.
Meanwhile El Nino is killing Vancouver, and my wife did a couple of hours of yard work earlier this week. Had to get my heat pump guy out today for a burnt out compressor motor and last month was so mild, he's hurting for receivables.
Hey, if you don't like the snow, you can always go to Rio. (Yahoo)
The headline tomorrow per Drudge is going to be:
NYT THURSDAY: THE BLIZZARDS ARE FROM THE WARMING.
You really need to understand the brilliance of these policymakers jumping on this issue, which is a premature theory. Whichever way the climate or the weather is going, can be used as proof that they are correct! Brilliant in a twisted way!!
BTW - our local nuke plant which has had numerous life-extensions beyond its origianl retirement date - Vermont Yankee - apparently is leaking Tritium into the groundwater, and then into a river. The news stations ran out, took some video of the river running, and now the whole area is upset about tritium, which very few people understand, or care to understand how much could be in the river. People are reacting to the newscasters and people's opinions at Walmart; sort of scaring each other like they do on that Ghost Hunters show on SyFy. (I think Vermont Yankee has more serious potential issues than that, and should be shut for those reasons).
What that report shows is the difference between deaths from a heat-wave and a very cold snap. I'm guessing without these elderly people who passed-away didn't have AC, and that there were many other people without AC. Only the elderly (very weakest?) passed away. Well with the cold, if you don't have heat, people of all ages die, not just the elderly.
I'd like you and others to make a guess on the following. If you take away fossil fuels of all sorts (that create CO2) from people north of the Mason Dixon line, what do you think the fatality rate will be over the winter? Do you think it will be 32 elderly? 200? I'd say the Earth is too cold; let it warm.
that's why the warmers are always right: too hot? global warming; too cold? global warming; too much ice / snow? global warming.
about the only thing global warming is not capable of is to make toasts for us.
another way to think of it is to ask how many kids could have been saved had we deployed the resources on global warming somewhere else, more productive?
is our enjoyment of viewing the ice caps really that much more important than a kid's life?
Just need some money. How are you managing? Oh yeah, Climate-Change Skeptics Have Received Fat Checks From ExxonMobil. (Green Car Advisor)
Well, you've earned it.
And as Drudge promised:
"Climate scientists say that no individual episode of severe weather can be attributed to global climate trends, though there is evidence that such events will probably become more frequent as global temperatures rise."
Climate-Change Debate Is Heating Up in Deep Freeze (NY Times)
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I think Sir Issac Newton said that first:
Rio Smoking Hot
RIO DE JANEIRO (AFP) – The worst heatwave to hit Rio de Janeiro in 50 years turned the city into a pre-Carnival furnace Wednesday, and killed 32 elderly people further south, officials said.
According to the Inmet national weather service, recorded temperatures in Rio were well above 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees) -- and felt more like above 50 degrees.
"The heatwave in Rio is seen as historic. February right now is the hottest month for the past 50 years," meteorologist Giovanni Dolif told the O Globo daily.
On Monday and Tuesday, the scalding conditions proved deadly for 32 elderly residents in Santos, a city close to Sao Paulo and 350 kilometers (220 miles) south of Rio.
Half of them succumbed in their homes and the other half died as they sought help in clinics, a spokeswoman for the city's health service told AFP.
The heatwave made Rio the hottest place on the planet on Tuesday, save for Ada, a town in eastern Ghana, according to data from the World Meteorological Organization.
Rio's recorded temperature that day was 46.3 degrees Celsius -- less than even the Sahara desert, which came in at a milder 33 degrees.
Dolif said being in Rio was worse than being in a dry desert because seaside humidity gave the temperature a suffocating boost, making it feel much higher.
El Nino, the phenomenon in which unusually hot Pacific Ocean waters disrupt weather patterns, was blamed for the heatwave by preventing the formation of clouds.
Rio's heatwave was forecast to continue into the weekend, when the city's famous four-day Carnival starts.
Sapped residents in the city have taken to going to the beaches at night to seek a respite from the heat.
Doctors were recommending cold showers and lots of liquids to mitigate the risks of heat exhaustion and dehydration.
Bogus is doing fine with their snowpack, but it's pretty thin skiing over in Big Sky Montana and at Grand Targhee. Don't know about the Washington/Oregon resorts, but El Nino may be hurting them.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Between droughts.
That is also why those "send me $200. and I will send you back $2 million" letters from Nigeria continue to work.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
"115 degrees is the hottest temperature ever recorded in Canada at Gleichen, Alberta on July 28, 1903."
http://www.alabamawx.com/?p=26125
Imagine that 115F in Canada, over 100 years ago. And that was even before all this GW hockey-stick from the adjusted data. I wonder what could have caused that?
So what we can conclude from all this is that there are and have been weather extremes, even where you wouldn't expect them. It does nothing to prove GW, never mind if man is significantly involved.
Summary: the climate may be shifting a little; can't tell because the IPCC has made the data collection and evaluation illegitimate by apparent bias and prejudice. But we can see from weather that the weather is not much different then it was around the world years ago. There is change, as there always has been change, but this change is overblown.
It worked for me! i'm now sitting home all day, writing anti-MMGW blogs for Exxon-Mobil. My lifetime free Speedpass also helps my budget.
Weather is by nature (pun intended) unpredictable.
Even if every global climate scientist on the planet wrote a paper on titled "MAN IS DEFINITELY MAKING THE EARTH WARMER" there will still be odd and unusual weather events- 100 year floods - 100 year snow storms etc etc.
We learn nothing by talking about "man, it sure is cold in the Northeast USA right now" or "man, it sure is hot in Rio right now."
High temp records, Cold temp records, Snow storms, heat waves, etc: None of that matters in regard to whether the Earf is warming due to man's activity.
Well, you started it !
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Gary started it a long time ago - posting stories about "cold this" and "record cold temps that."
I told him then that for every "cold" story he posted, I could post a corresponding "heat" story.
My last post was to indicate how silly that really is. Because none of those stories really have anything to do with proving or disproving anything.
Sure it matters. Don't climatologists take weather data to determine the climate? How can you determine the climate temperature, if you don't use the weather temperatures every day from around the world over a period of years? If it isn't weather data that's being used, what do they use? are you claiming their claims are totally bogus?
Sure, the temps matter. But you gotta ignore the high and low extremes, because they "cancel" one another out, and always will.
It's TRENDS that matter. 10 consecutive "hotter than the average" summers matters, as would 10 consecutive "colder than average" winters.
But a day with an all-time low temp for Smuckatelli, Idaho? Doesn't matter.
Just like a day with an all-time high temp for Smuckatelli, Idaho would also not matter.
When I say "they wouldn't matter" I mean in the search for whether or not the Earf is warming due to man's activity they wouldn't matter. A record high temp and a record low temp will ALWAYS OCCUR regardless of what man is or is not doing to the climate.
Just like a day with an all-time high temp for Smuckatelli, Idaho would also not matter
Now you have managed to marginalize and alienate all the folks in Smuckatgelli, Idaho. :shades:
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
No you don't throw scientific data out in an analysis, if there is not a flaw in the data! The data will probably fall in a normal distribution - Bell Curve, and you would distort that ruining any calculation of standard deviations. You would falsely calcualte less variability than actually occurs. Is this why climatologists now think there are more weather extreme than normal? :P This would be like discounting dwarves and giants from height-studies, and then tomorrow when a giant is found, reporting "aha, a giant, that's proof of genetic extremes occurring".
You're trying to argue that the world is getting hotter on average - climate. People are using stories like that in Rio to say - there's proof of GW. I then say, that's not proof it was the same temperature 100 years ago IN CANADA, of all places.
Whomever these "people" are who are "trying to say the Rio heat wave is proof of Global Warming" are JUST AS WRONG as anyone who tries to say "two feet of snow in Washington DC in the WINTER means Global Warming is Hooey."
Neither one ( of those statements ) is true.
A single cold snap and/or heat wave, ALONE, does not affect "global climate" data any more than it being cold for a few summer days or hot for a few winter days in Smuckatelli, Idaho.
Just like "because it was 115 degrees in Canada 100 years ago, Global Warming is hooey" is completely untrue.
and that's why those Nigeria con artists are so value-add, in my view: they separate the fools from their gold.
My phone here in Boise has been ringing off the wall ever since Larsb posted that. Good elk sausage up that way.
And temp extremes may indicate global warming as those links I've been posting here for months now say. One by itself may not mean anything other than weather, but when they keep piling up, you have to wonder if global warming is having an affect (like the prediction that we'll have more moisture and thus more floods and snow events).
I'm not trying to prove 1) that the climate is warming, 2) that if the climate is warming that man is a major contributor, and 3) that warming is a net negative for the globe and not a positive.
I am pointing out potential flaws in 1) the way data is collected versus years ago and when that's comparing apples and oranges, 2) other flaws in how data is collected, 3) who's handling the data and whether they are unbiased, 4) the release of the e-mails which strongly indicates data is being changed by the IPCC, due to bias, 5) the political and other hacks who stand to make a lot of $ by having the IPCC theory being stated as close to fact, 6) pointing out that it would be good if the average temperature increased on good old planet Earth - my point about less fuel would be burnt to keep warm, and 7) how it just seems so convenient that no matter what happens in the climate or in the weather, it is now disseminated thru the media that this is now attributed to MMGW.
I'm not the one who several years ago when there were a few extra hurricanes (weather) got on the major news channels and said this is attributable to GW. I'm not the one who put out a report falsely claiming the glaciers in the Himalayas would be melted by 2035 due to the GW being fed by man emitting CO2. If someone unfairly picks up a stick to hit me, I'm also going to pick up a stick.
This whole subject isn't science anymore. It's a witch-doctor using the rumbling volcano to control - when it rumbles he the people they must repent and change their ways; if the volcano is quiet, he takes credit. No matter which way the volcano goes, he uses it. You believe the witch-doctor; he tells you the villagers affect the volcano, I say sure we stop on the ground and vibrate it a little, but that really doesn't matter.
You want to believe in the witchdoctors telling you that we control this naturally occurring systems, and are a big influence. You're impressed by the witchdoctors title and the chief telling you the witchdoctor has great knowledge. I want proof, other then the scientific knowledge that when we walk we vibrate the ground very slightly.
Or do we just now have more weather stations, more people who report into the TV stations, and better communication technology? Years ago when people relied on their hometown newspaper, did they carry every story like you can go find today on the web? Would the Rio story have made the Smuckatgelli gazette?
larsb's point, which is a valid one, is that it is wrong for the warmers to point to extreme summer heat as proof of their cause, and it is equally wrong of the anti-warmers to point to the extreme winter snow as a proof of their cause too.
Both approaches are un-scientific.
Glad someone got that much...:)