Imagine yourself as a big time editor, and somebody brings you an article with the headline, "Cold Wave in India Attributed to Global Warming."
Wouldn't you strongly suggest a rewrite?
Well, no such sanity occurred at the Indian website Sify on Tuesday.
Instead, that preposterous title actually did get published atop an article of equally absurd and hypocritical content (emphasis added):
Mumbai: The recent cold wave sweeping across Mumbai and other parts of India could be attributed to global warming, experts said on Tuesday here at an environmental conference.Addressing the ‘Combat Global Warming’ conference at the Indian Merchants Chamber (IMC) here, former Union minister for power and environment Suresh Prabhu said global warming was primarily a problem created and induced by human beings.
He said the increase in emission of green house gases like carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and methane had resulted in the situation, which could prove catastrophic if unchecked.
Prabhu said the cold wave that swept Maharashtra and other parts of India recently could be attributed to the phenomenon of global warming.
Astounding, wouldn't you agree?
After all, the foundation of anthropogenic global warming is that carbon dioxide placed in the atmosphere by man is exacerbating the greenhouse effect thereby making the planet heat up to dangerous levels that will melt glaciers and polar icecaps making ocean levels rise and eventually swamp coastal areas around the world.
Yet, conveniently, now that we have entered solar cycle 24, and the planet as predicted by many scientists is starting to cool, the global warming crowd is blaming it on carbon dioxide.
Which is it, folks: is carbon dioxide WARMING the planet, or COOLING it?
In the end, it's a wonderful position of infallibility these folks have created, for now regardless of what the weather does, it can all be attributed to man.
Sadly, the joke's on us, for poorly educated and biased media representatives not only don't recognize the hypocrisy in this position, but also certainly won't question it.
How unfortunate for all of us.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Climate change is all the rage now.
February 13, 2008 - 12:45 ET by upcountrywaterI'm a right wing insurgent, global warming denier.
Let me know when it hits 120 F in Omaha this year ok?
I noticed China wasn't on their co2 bad boy list.
iranian uranium; iranian ICBM's iranian satellites..
4 (unthinkable) H-bombs, NOW THAT'S SOME CHANGE
Keep the change Bob. h/t Sam Peckinpah
I'm going to go shovel the
February 13, 2008 - 12:47 ET by be_objectiveI'm going to go shovel the snow out of my drive way while I try to wrap my brain around that logic (our snowfall is 2 feet above normal this year). Just another example of how the envirowackos are up to there ice caps in denial and can't use logic.
"In any compromise between good and evil, only evil can profit." Ayn Rand
The synopsis for the movie
February 13, 2008 - 20:26 ET by motherbeltThe synopsis for the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" reads: "Global warming causes a new Ice Age."
I kid you not. Go figure.
Global warming - the
February 13, 2008 - 20:59 ET by GregEGlobal warming - the perfect issue. They can blame any weather situation on it and people buy it.
This is likely one reason why the term Global Warming is being replaced slowly by "Global Climate Change." Just keep watching. The GW word will get pushed into the sunset very soon.
THUD!
February 13, 2008 - 12:47 ET by Sick-n-TiredI have been waiting, cautiously, for that other shoe to drop for some time now. I have a feeling this will be the crack that opens Pandora's Box and and the segway that will enable Gore and rest to get the angle on the 'cold part' of global warming. If they are able to indoctrinate the masses into believing this we are in big trouble; or as you said Noel "How unfortunate for all of us". This indeed will give them the ability, via AGW or moreover CLIMATE CHANGE, to raise taxes etc. to control our lives. Lindzen said it best (below), although he should have added "Controlling the masses through junk science and bad P.R. and/or....".
I have a feeling things are going to get real interesting in the science community....
"Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Richard Lindzen - March 2007.
I have a scientific
February 13, 2008 - 13:22 ET by TruthMongerI have a scientific explanation for this ,you GW deniers...
I have recently observed that when my house cools off via air-conditioning, the air outside - blowing out of the AC - is VERY HOT
thus warming the globe - and so I believe this is why India is currently experiencing increasing heat waves now
it's "Amana" made global warming from all the new air-conditioning in China and Dubai
HA! aMANa made global
February 13, 2008 - 14:41 ET by Sick-n-TiredHA! aMANa made global warming. Love it. nice play on words.
"Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Richard Lindzen - March 2007.
I guess these knuckleheads
February 13, 2008 - 12:49 ET by ConservativeRexI guess these knuckleheads proved that you CAN drop enough acid and come up with something to write about. I'm losing track.
GW caused the Little Ice Age
February 13, 2008 - 12:54 ET by Gary HallWe need to stop thinking about this in the short term, Noel. There was global warming (Medieval climate optimum) prior to the last Little Ice Age and we have experience normal global warming (Gorian deranged warming period) following the last little ice age.
Surely the Little Ice Age could be attributed to the phenomenon of anthropogenic global warming. LOL
The easy prediction. There perhaps is some truth to the view that the little ice age (especially the effect on Europe) was enhanced by the prior melt in the arctic - the partial interruption in the warm gulf stream etc. As well, perhaps (perhaps not) that might occur again as before - and perhaps sooner than later (re-freezing of the arctic ice takes longer than does the melting). One can only assume that rather than appreciating the obvious cyclic nature of the earth, this shrill nutsy crowd will indeed jump to blame any future cooling of the climate on anthropogenic global warming.
Ultimate Climate Change Theory AND Proof
February 13, 2008 - 17:05 ET by needleYes! Yes! I get it. I get it.
The key is the focus on the little Ice Age. Notice how the time scale emphasis is telescoping.
Ok, I want to be the first to proclaim this (I will accept my Nobel Prize later):
Ultimate Climate Change Theory AND Proof:
Theory: The weather, averaging from cool to very cold, experienced in the Northern Hemisphere, especially several degrees north of the Topic of Cancer in the months between November and April invariability leads to warm, to hot, and sometimes to very hot, weather in the months between May and October.
Proof: This may be corroborated by studying calendar-temperature information as far back as it is available.
Ergo: Global Warming. Quod Erat Demonstrandum
Furthermore an inversely correlating phenomenon is consistently observable (how ‘bout that cool junk science talk, eh?) in the Southern Hemisphere.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
February 13, 2008 - 12:58 ET by Roger the ShrubberBe afraid. Be very afraid.
Hysterical! I woke up
February 13, 2008 - 13:18 ET by rimskyHysterical!
I woke up to an radio news report yesterday morning of how our wonderful Mayor here in NYC pledged, among other things, to reduce the amount of tropical hardwoods used by city agencies in an effort to slow AGW.
Whew! The things these selfless servants do! I mean, think of the sacrafice!
Roger, what a great site,
February 13, 2008 - 15:45 ET by KarmaRoger, what a great site, thanks for the link. ProfessorPravda would be proud of you.
It was good that you agreed
February 13, 2008 - 17:27 ET by Roger the ShrubberIt was good that you agreed with me. Dissent is not welcome, comrade!
Not Just India
February 13, 2008 - 13:11 ET by Mike From CanmoreIt's not just India. Our illustrious BC premier blamed the frozen Nechako River in Prince George on GW. Still trying to get my head around that one.
Levering disasters/irrational fear for political /financial capital. That's what is all about.
There are 2 types of politicians. Those who know AGW is a sham and stupid ones.
AGW = Drought or Deluge. How about frogs?
February 13, 2008 - 13:26 ET by Gary HallNoel, did you catch the last ridiculous prediction in this story?
Results? Drought. No, deluge. No, Drought. No, just in case we're wrong, deluge or drought. How about frogs or boils? Hey, you never know.
Oh sweet Jesus!
February 13, 2008 - 13:33 ET by RackieClimate scientist and global warming expert Daryl Hannah and British billionaire offer to ride herd on carbon emitters for the UN.
These people have decided
February 13, 2008 - 13:44 ET by danboThese people have decided they're god. They're the only ones with divine wisdom. And demand that the UN and governments mandate and force people to live as they dictate.
Millions died because of these people after the insanity over DDT. That price will be cheap if these people have their way.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
As I said earlier. It's a
February 13, 2008 - 13:36 ET by danboAs I said earlier. It's a wierd greenhouse we have here.
My suggestion to these "Einsteins". Throw out the air conditioners at your office. You don't need it. When it get's hot. Just turn up the heat. After all heat causes cold.
If I want my Scotch on the rocks? At what setting do I turn my oven to to make the ice? Broil?
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Global Warming
February 13, 2008 - 15:41 ET by BritcomI thought you all might like to see what the government is spending your tax dollars on.
(Don't look PopTech, you'll blow a gasket.)
Link >>
---
Huckabee/Hunter '08
EPA Kids Site
February 13, 2008 - 16:23 ET by Giles WinterbourneWhile I imagine it is costing us about as much as Marano/Inhofe's editorial, I mean, EPA Minority page, it is much more effective in providing quality information.
I'm going to do my part to save the planet...I think.
February 13, 2008 - 15:58 ET by Wilbur747OK, that's it. I have to tell my wife that she needs to wear socks at night since her cold feet will eventually destroy us all.
Either way, I can't take a chance. I must save the planet. I'll stop exercising cuz if I'm outside, my body heat may cause global warming, which will cause global cooling, so I'll go into my air conditioned house to cool off, which will cause global warming creating snow storm in Omaha.
No, I'll go swimming instead, but that will then cause global cooling with the splashing around releasing water vapor thus causing the greenhouse effect later causing global warming.
I'll just sit here on the couch, but then I'll end up eating something that has ingredients that caused warming, unless I ....ARRRRGGGHHH!
I'm sooo confused, if global warming causes global cooling, does global cooling cause global warming...and wouldn't that just cancel each other out?
I'm Sweating a River, It's So Cold
February 13, 2008 - 16:03 ET by JoelCTSo, the more I drive my SUV, the colder it gets in India. Hey, the last I heard, it gets really hot there, so maybe they're appreciating it. I think I'll drive across town just for the heck of it!
Whenever someone e-mails me more GW BS, I always send them this picture, which explains the last ten years, at least to me:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071203.html
Been there!
February 13, 2008 - 16:11 ET by Wilbur747In my past military life, I visited several cities in India. You're absolutley right, it gets, hot, extremely humid, sticky and in some places smelly.
If I were living there, I'd relish some cold weather! Less bugs, rotting smell of dead animal carcasses, etc.
A good freeze...once in a while... helps out.
re: I'm Sweating a River, It's So Cold
February 13, 2008 - 16:33 ET by Giles WinterbourneUnfortunately, there isn't any data that supports solar cycle and GW.
The solar activity has a very minor (less than .01 degree) effect on global average temp.
And increased rain and snow, temp extremes are predicted in the GW data, so while it seems silly to report and seemingly adds humor, they are expected.
It is a complex field, and any individual event may or may not be an effect of GW, but there are plenty of other events that are easy enough to attribute to increased manmade CO2 - species and disease migration for example.
So hope you're innoculated for diseases 20 degrees south of you, hope your local food producers can accomodate new pests.
No credible data for man made Gw either
February 13, 2008 - 17:17 ET by Wilbur747Actually, there is credible data supporting solar cycle warming, more so than for man-made GW. Right here at the UofA and the scientists on Kitt Peak to start. Answer me this, why has Mars gone through the same change in it's global temperature as we have?
You mention .01 degree for solar activity when many scientists say that overall GW is .02 degree in 100 years.
Why are we worried about .02 degrees? This cycle has been proven to have occured over the past 1500 years. Long before man has driven SUVs.
The only reason that increased snow/rain, etc are "predicted" is because the model used for anthropogenic GW can be manipulated by its user to achieve any outcome he or she desires. You will see what may happen based soley on your inputs. Funny how not one of the 'inputs' in the model used by the IPCC scientists included water vapor produce naturally by certain plants such as corn.
Another thing to consider is that the vast majority of Pro-AGW scientists are not conservatives, but have left/liberal/socialist backgrounds. They have an agenda... Much like you must have with your 'scare' about being innoculated for disease. Disease based on insect infestation is on the decline. My sister is an MD who studies such matters.
I guess if you're predicting we're going to die from bugs, then I'll have to break out my can of OFF.
Finally with regards your "predictions". Several years ago I conducted my own, albeit unscientific, study of weather predictions. I found that, on average, weather predictions over 72 hours in the future have a 2.9% accuracy rate. How can we trust ANY global warming/cooling advocate when they can't even get the 72 hour forcast right?
"The solar activity has a
February 13, 2008 - 18:33 ET by NL207"The solar activity has a very minor (less than .01 degree) effect on global average temp. "
Your statement is contrary to available scientific data on the subject. This study directly contradicts your 'data'. Its abstract says "The correlation of reconstructed solar irradiance and Northern Hemisphere (NH) surface temperature is 0.86 in the pre-industrial period from 1610 to 1800, implying a predominant solar influence. Extending this correlation to the present suggests that solar forcing may have contributed about half of the observed 0.55°C surface warming since 1860 and one third of the warming since 1970."
Nor is this new data. This paper is from 1995, which also contradicts the phony Naomi Oreskes consensus piece published in Science Mag. Oreskes claimed she could locate no such papers in the ISI Thomson database dated between 1993 and 2003 containing the words, "Climate Change". They are in the TITLE of this paper and this paper is in the ISI Thomson database.
Press Release SSRC 1-2008
February 13, 2008 - 17:47 ET by TheTruthPress Release SSRC 1-2008
The Truth - on converting ethanol back to corn..
February 13, 2008 - 18:00 ET by Gary HallThe Truth. Looks like the next developing industry might need to be one that converts ethanol back into corn.. so that people can eat.
I there's an increase in
February 13, 2008 - 18:07 ET by danboI there's an increase in disease. It because of the misguided environmentalist who run off with pseudo science. Malaria is a case in point.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Al Gores nightmare unfolds
February 13, 2008 - 17:42 ET by TheTruthJoelCT
Whenever someone e-mails me more GW BS, I always send them this picture, which explains the last ten years, at least to me:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071203.html
LOL. . . That NASA solar cycle image should be labeled "Al Gores nightmare unfolds"
Hottest recorded tempertures.
February 13, 2008 - 18:48 ET by danboAs we keep hearing about how it's getting hotter. I thought these should be presented.
Hottest temperture ever recorded.
Anywhere; Al'Aziziyah, Lybia 136F date 9/13/1922
North America; Death Valley 134F date 7/10/1913.
Canada: Midale, Sask. 113F date 7/5/1937.
Asia; Tirat Tsvi, Israel 129F 6/21/1942.
Australia; Oodnadatta, SA 123F 1/2/1960.
Europe, Seville, Spain 122F 8/4/1881.
South America; Villa de Maria, Argentina, 120F 1/2/1920.
Antarctica; Vanda Station, Scott Coast 59F 1/5/1974
South Pole: 7.5F 12/27/1978
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
The Island
February 13, 2008 - 22:13 ET by masslibertarianThe claims that [pick a recent year] was the "hottest year on record" are based on the trend in average daily high/low temperatures. The dirty little secret underlying the trend is that the highs (like you listed above) don't appear to be getting higher. The only discernable trend appears to be higher lows.
Now, if I were a betting man, I'd lay money on the lions' share of this trend ultimately being attributed to the urban heat island effect and other land use changes, deterioration of the surface station network (see http://www.surfacest...) and measurement errors.
Speaking of which, the staistically inclined should check out Steve McIntyre's (http://www.climateau...) blog post in the last couple of weeks regarding the amount of estimated data that's in NASA GISS's latest proclamation of 2007 as the hottest year on record. Looks like the makings of another quiet correction from the "muzzled" Jim Hansen to me.
Is 2007 the warmest now?
February 14, 2008 - 00:31 ET by danboIs 2007 the warmest now? It was the second warmest a few weeks ago. Is Hanson adjusting again? This is magical adjustments as so much of South America, and Australia went into a major cold period.
Hansen did the same thing in 2005. No one else agreed or accepted 2005 as the warmest. Except a few warmer hysterics. Not even IPCC. But Hansen with his adjusted data made some headlines.
Everywhere but Hansen still holds 1998 as the warmest year. I guess, Hansen figures he has to adjust. As "too" long without a record isn't good for the religion. So if you have to lie, excuse me, adjust a little...
As far as average maximum data and minimum data. The US Historical Climatology Network has than along with yearly precipitation just click on the map on the bottom of this page.
It's nice to look at when they start going hysterial.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Hansen
February 14, 2008 - 07:27 ET by masslibertarianThe adjusters are adjusting so fast the jesters can't keep up.
There's another interesting tidbit in McIntyre's post. There are a lot of holes in the station data from mid-2006 forward. This is attributed to a lag in getting the data input, but with all the focus placed on AGW, wouldn't you think they'd be a little more on top of this?
It's hard to get excited about betting trillions of dollars on data from 19th-century weather stations (that weren't designed to measure temps with the level of precision now being used anyway). Hopefully the CRN will help, but it's probably going to be too late in arriving to help head this train wreck off.
We could use some of that
February 13, 2008 - 21:01 ET by Free StinkerWe could use some of that Global Warming in New Jersey right about now.
Newsbusters. Log on and find out What the heck is so yummy over here!
global warmers will take credit when it naturally turns cold
February 13, 2008 - 22:11 ET by lunaticcringeradioi'm telling you that when the naturally occuring heat and cold cycle turns cold again, and it matters not what we do, the global warmers will say it was all due to their efforts to make companies and governments cut their "dreadful" co2 emmisions and along with it their true ulterior motive to cut economic productivity. the glob warms are going to use this natural occurance as proof they were right.
lunaticcringeradio