Global Warming MIA in Election Campaign

  • Bookmark and Share

Is it time yet to put global warming on milk cartons? Perhaps. You might have noticed, or rather, not noticed the lack of much discussion of global warming in this campaign despite months of hammering by the mainstream media about its supposed danger to the planet. Al Gore even stated last summer that global warming was even more of a threat to us than terrorism. And now that the election campaign has begun, nothing, or almost nothing, on this topic. Why? One reason is probably that the MSM is believing the polls which oversample the Democrats due to Operation Chaos as well as fraudulent ACORN "voters" and don't want to jinx things for Barack Obama by bringing up the topic of global warming and all the spending they previously claimed would be necessary to counter it. Another reason is that Mother Nature is just not cooperating with the global warming theory. Here is a sampling of current weather reports from around the nation starting with this report from the Idaho Mountain Express:

A low-pressure weather system is lined up to hit the Wood River Valley tonight and into the weekend, delivering cold temperatures and, possibly, snow in the higher elevations.

A weather forecast from the National Weather Service this morning predicts that the system will roll into the region later today, bringing a 40 percent chance of snow tonight. The greatest chance of snow, according to the National Weather Service, will come during the day Friday and again on Saturday night.

The latest NWS forecast for Ketchum is: 

Today: A 10 percent chance of snow showers after noon. Partly sunny, with a high near 49. North northwest wind 7 to 11 mph becoming south.

Tonight: A 40 percent chance of snow. Mostly cloudy, with a low around 16. Northwest wind between 11 and 14 mph becoming calm. Winds could gust as high as 22 mph. Little or no snow accumulation expected.

Friday: A 50 percent chance of snow. Cloudy, with a high near 41. North northwest wind between 5 and 14 mph, with gusts as high as 22 mph. New snow accumulation of around an inch possible.

Friday night: A 40 percent chance of snow. Mostly cloudy, with a low around 15. North northwest wind between 7 and 13 mph, with gusts as high as 21 mph.

Saturday: A 40 percent chance of snow. Mostly cloudy, with a high near 34. North northwest wind between 13 and 18 mph, with gusts as high as 26 mph.

Saturday night: A 50 percent chance of snow. Mostly cloudy, with a low around 14.

Sunday: Partly sunny, with a high near 41.

Sunday night: Partly cloudy, with a low around 14. 

Okay, but that was in a mountainous area. How about lower elevations? Well, here is a report from KAPP TV in Yakima, Washington:

YAKIMA -- The cold weather has turned this year's harvest into a race against time.

    Barret Orchard workers are scrambling to get the red wine grapes off the vine.

"They're perfect right now, we've got real good sugars in these reds right now," says owner Mark Barret.

    Since they don't have a machine, workers have to do it by hand as fast as they can.

    If the grapes stay on the vine for much longer, our recent cold weather may make them not so perfect.

"If it's gonna get down to 25 we can get some freeze damage in them and they won't have as good of a quality in the grape," says Barret.

    The cold weather has pushed up not only the grape harvest, but the apple harvest as well.

An even wider range of plummeting temperatures was reported by the Weather Underground:

The season's first large western snowstorm was expected to continue across the Intermountain West and northern Rockies on Sunday, while showers and thunderstorms were forecast from the southern Plains to the upper Mississippi Valley.

Snow was predicted as far east as western Colorado and the western Dakotas. The heaviest snow was expected from eastern Idaho into northern Wyoming and eastern Montana, where up to a foot or more was likely.

Severe thunderstorms were possible across parts of the southern and central Plains, with the main threat being large hail and damaging winds.

Tranquil weather was forecast for the rest of the nation, except for parts of the Southeast, where scattered showers and thunderstorms were possible.

Another chilly day was forecast across the West. Temperatures could drop to record or near-record levels Sunday morning in parts of the Pacific Northwest and California. 

It's a bit tough to be injecting global warming into this campaign when much of the nation is experiencing record or near-record cold temperatures even though we are still in the first half of October. Or should the manufactured climate change crises  shift gears to warn of impending global cooling? In any event, the global warming topic seems to have gone missing from the campaign trail.

—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It's October

It's snowing ... That's got to be traumatic to the hoaxers.

Our plan is working!

  We at the evil Rove-Cheney-JWF cabal have planted billions of trees at secret locations in the Amazon to soak up all the extra carbon dioxide. This will cool the planet.

  We will cut them all down after the election and use the pulp to print eviction notices on all the poor people. This will warm the planet and make all the poor now homeless people sweat in the sunshine.

  Why? Duh, we are evil. Do you not pay attention?

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

CLASSIC!!

JWF, that is classic!!

Be patient

"Climate Change" will rear it's ridiculous head again once all the other "crises" wear off.  If there is one thing we can count on, it's another crisis right around the corner. Politicians cannot get re-elected without one.

Global warming is out,

Global warming is out, climate change is in. Down here we call it "winter". In a few months global warming will be back - we call that "summer".

Do Not Worry

Don't worry, P. J., as soon as we have another hot summer or mild winter, they'll be back!

I know someone who believes all that claptrap and it is really sad. He's a excellent programmer with above-average intelligence, but this global warming garbage has him hooked. He wants so badly to believe that human beings actually have the ability to change the climate of this planet, that it is impossible to convince him that nothing is happening.

September Average Temperatures, Austin Texas
2008   77.9
2007   78.7
2006   78.7
2005   84.1
2004   78.3
2003   75.8

2005 is proof of Global Warming, I tell you! Dang you GW Skeptics to Heck!!!!

Repost for your programmer friend

 The wife's relatives in the Philippines burn charcoaled coconut husks for cooking fuel.

  The carbon trapped in the husks are released in the air as carbon dioxide.

  Our coconut trees absorb the carbon dioxide and make new coconuts.

  The coconut husks are charcoaled and burned and release carbon dioxide.

  Our coconut trees absorb......infinitum

  It is called the carbon cycle. Besides the fuel, we get tasty tasty coconut meat in the bargain.

  LONG LIVE THE CARBON CYCLE!

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

The Year of Blank Suns

2008 has been one of the blankest years on record for sunspots.  Here is what the sun with sunspots looks like.  Here is what the sun has looked like for most of the year 2008.  Here is an article, Spotless Sun: Blankest Year of the Space Age, that appeared on a NASA website.  Excerpt:

Sept. 30, 2008: Astronomers who count sunspots have announced that 2008 is now the "blankest year" of the Space Age.

As of Sept. 27, 2008, the sun had been blank, i.e., had no visible sunspots, on 200 days of the year. To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go back to 1954, three years before the launch of Sputnik, when the sun was blank 241 times.

"Sunspot counts are at a 50-year low," says solar physicist David Hathaway of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. "We're experiencing a deep minimum of the solar cycle."

What this may mean is that we may be headed into a cooling cycle if the current minimum lasts much longer than expected.  Actually it has already gone longer than expected, scientists have already revised their predictions of sunspot numbers several times.  I have detected what seems to me to be excitement every time a new, tiny, nearly undetectable sunspot shows up.  August was a "blank" month, although they ended up giving it a sunspot number of 0.5 due to a "proto"-sunspot that appeared for several days, then disappeared.  You can go here for a series of images for August '08 that will allow you to scroll through the whole month's images.  Play "find the sunspot".  It will amuse you.  It first appeared on about 8-21.  Here is an image of it.  The curent spot that just showed up on Friday, I think, is here. 

There are of course, non-consensus types out there speculating on this.  Thomas Lifson from American Thinker has this going (I'm not absolutely sure it's him, but his name appears on the author's spot).

The scientific types are nearly breathless every time a new spot shows, ever since January when they proclaimed a tiny spot the first of the new cycle-24.  We'll have to wait and see. 

Update:  here is an image of the current spot.

 

 

"The future is not set.  There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com

Well Done

Well put.

As I like to say, "Here's your global warming reason:"

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap071203.html

 

A Little Late

Great picture.  I found it interesting that in the explanatory text was the following statement:

"Solar minimums occurred in 1996 and 2007"

The cycle seems to be running a little behind schedule as we are now in year 12 and still in a minimum phase with frequent blank suns.

And it is a very quiet time. If solar activity continues as low as it has been, 2008 could rack up a whopping 290 spotless days by the end of December, making it a century-level year in terms of spotlessness...

Hathaway cautions that this development may sound more exciting than it actually is: "While the solar minimum of 2008 is shaping up to be the deepest of the Space Age, it is still unremarkable compared to the long and deep solar minima of the late 19th and early 20th centuries." Those earlier minima routinely racked up 200 to 300 spotless days per year.

But, there is not enough evidence to actually support a delayed onset to the increase in monthly smoothed sunspots yet.  If we get essentially blank suns for the rest of the year, they may have to revise their predictions.  Who is "they"?:

Solar Cycle 24 Consensus Prediction (PPT) – Douglas Biesecker, NOAA, SEC

Then again, if the  sunspot numbers continue to increase following the advent of the current spot, the cycle should be back on track.

"The future is not set.  There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com

Carbon tax language was

Carbon tax language was included in the bailout legislation.  McCain holds himself out to be a believer, also.  So, why say anything more about.  It's a done deal that's coming to everyone's doorstep.

Lay Down?

So you're saying give up the fight???  Not here.  I'm a denier.  Period.

"The future is not set.  There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com

I was giving the possible

I was giving the possible reason the campaigns have been quiet on GW.  Both camps are onboard with the notion that CO2 is the scourge of the world.  Hence, no issue.

At my house, the only thing we have against CO2 is it makes our grass grow too fast...hardly a reason to sequester and pump it into the ground.

 For the record:  I think AGW is and always has been a scam. 

It was brought up, during the V P Debate.

Biden brought up Global Warming, during the VP debate and said that he knew it was positively caused by man.  McCain has no clue, he's just saying whatever he can to get elected.  Someone convinced him about AGW so he's on the bandwagon. I'm sure President Obama will be getting those carbon taxes ready so he can give the poor folks electric, non-polluting cars.   

Democrats: Stuck on Stupid since 2000.

Coldest June in Seattle in 60 years shut up the Greenies

And July and August had some "Brief" warming, and as I left Seattle at the end of August, they were mumbling under their breath and wearing layers . . .

It's the SUN SPOTS you bunch of ignorant Green heads, Sol has the BIGGEST impact on the weather, and when the Sun Spots go, so goes a few degrees. . . .But, there IS hope, when it gets REALLY COLD this Winter, just jump in your SUV and drive around the block to warm it up . . .Opps, GM isn't making 'em anymore ?  well, jump in your Used SUV and fix the weather.

Kids are going to Grow up and there isn't a Santa Claus, and there isn't any Global Warming, Mom and Dad lied, and so did the School Teachers and MSM.

The Republican Revolution will not be Televised

Try again: "On May 6, 2000,

Try again: "On May 6, 2000, however, New Scientist magazine reported that Lassen and astrophysicist Peter Thejll had updated Lassen's 1991 research and found that while the solar cycle still accounts for about half the temperature rise since 1900, it fails to explain a rise of 0.4 °C since 1980. "The curves diverge after 1980," Thejll said, "and it's a startlingly large deviation. Something else is acting on the climate.... It has the fingerprints of the greenhouse effect."[41]

Later that same year, Peter Stott and other researchers at the Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom published a paper in which they reported on the most comprehensive model simulations to date of the climate of the 20th century. Their study looked at both "natural forcing agents" (solar variations and volcanic emissions) as well as "anthropogenic forcing" (greenhouse gases and sulphate aerosols). They found that "solar effects may have contributed significantly to the warming in the first half of the century although this result is dependent on the reconstruction of total solar irradiance that is used. In the latter half of the century, we find that anthropogenic increases in greenhouses gases are largely responsible for the observed warming, balanced by some cooling due to anthropogenic sulphate aerosols, with no evidence for significant solar effects." Stott's team found that combining all of these factors enabled them to closely simulate global temperature changes throughout the 20th century. They predicted that continued greenhouse gas emissions would cause additional future temperature increases "at a rate similar to that observed in recent decades". It should be noted that their solar forcing included "spectrally-resolved changes in solar irradiance" and not the indirect effects mediated through cosmic rays for which there is still no accepted mechanism — these ideas are still being fleshed out.[42] In addition, the study notes "uncertainties in historical forcing" — in other words, past natural forcing may still be having a delayed warming effect, most likely due to the oceans.[43] A graphical representation[44] of the relationship between natural and anthropogenic factors contributing to climate change appears in "Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis", a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation#Solar_variation_theory

Oh, but that's just the liberal bias of Wikipedia editors that they justify with their bogus "neutral point of view" policy. Also something worth considering with regard to both sun spots and anthropogenic climate change:

"Physicist and historian Spencer R. Weart in The Discovery of Global Warming (2003) writes:

The study of [sun spot] cycles was generally popular through the first half of the century. Governments had collected a lot of weather data to play with and inevitably people found correlations between sun spot cycles and select weather patterns. If rainfall in England didn't fit the cycle, maybe storminess in New England would. Respected scientists and enthusiastic amateurs insisted they had found patterns reliable enough to make predictions. Sooner or later though every prediction failed. An example was a highly credible forecast of a dry spell in Africa during the sunspot minimum of the early 1930s. When the period turned out to be wet, a meteorologist later recalled "the subject of sunspots and weather relationships fell into dispute, especially among British meteorologists who witnessed the discomfiture of some of their most respected superiors." Even in the 1960s he said, "For a young [climate] researcher to entertain any statement of sun-weather relationships was to brand oneself a crank."[47])"

Morgan, Do a review of the

Morgan, Do a review of the changes in locations, or the lack thereof, in the weather stations that are the basis of reports of this rise in temperature.  Death Valley added one out on a salt pan to achieve higher temperature, to regain the "Hottest Spot on Earth" label.  There have been a lot of reports of the "help" global warming alarmists have given the temperature, especially in the last few years.  As we prepare for another winter, with the predictions of below-normal temperatures, take heart that it ain't as bad as they say and note that giving my tax dollars to Mexico or North Korea won't solve anything.  It will just make Al Gore richer as he invests in the companies that manage carbon credits. 

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."  - Sir Winston Churchill

don't all the candidates agree?

hey P.J.,

I thought global warming/climate change wasn't an issue because all of the candidates have said that it's real and that we have to do something about it. I remember when Palin and Biden agreed on that in their debate--it was like when they agreed not to change the definition of marriage but to extend the rights of civil unions, or when they agreed that they both supported Israel. Maybe that's why the debate was so boring--to much agreement!

THere is no global warming

THere is no global warming it is now climate change. We will experience global cooling for a few months then in June we will return to global warming.

global something or other

heh, actually, some commentators prefer--get this--"global weirding" because they say that's what it really is: the weather becoming weirder and more extreme--more hurricanes, tornadoes, out-of-season temperatures.

Whereas, one of the big problems with the name "global warming" is that people always think it means things will get warmer. 

But whatever we call it, Biden and Palin and McCain and Obama seem to agree it's an issue.

Please read the history

Please read the history books and you will find more severe hurricanes in the past than we are having now. look up two cities in particular - Houston, Tex. and Cameron, La.

He can't.

  You are asking a dyed in the wool liberal loonytunes to shut his yap and listen.

   They don't understand things like facts or the truth. They just keep repeating the same worn out phrases and idioms to each other.

   They are not very bright either. They have trouble navigating the web. He thinks he is at the Daily Kos site and we all agree and will repeat his little mantra's. 

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

You're right, but my friends

You're right, but my friends Bugs and Elmer might be offended by the loonytunes comparison.

NN

Why should I support the candidate that believes global warming is real? Algore promised me that I would be roasted by now and the polar bears would all be gone and the polar ice caps would be melted. I am comfortable, there are more polar bears and the polar ice caps are bigger. Is Algore stupid or is he just out to make big money by telling a big lie?

clarification

Hey Coco,

Sorry, if I wasn't clear--some of my other posts on this thread may be clearer. I wasn't saying you should support one candidate over the other because only one believes in global warming.

My point is that both candidates believe that global warming is real, both believe that it's largely due to man, and both support limiting our carbon emissions as a way of dealing with it.

Both Candidates believe GW votes are real, and want to Keep'em

Congress will NOT pass a law, and the President cannot legislate . . . If Clinton, Obama, McCain, Biden REALLY believed in GW . . They can Legislate . . .They can Introduce Bills. . . they are Senators . . .Yet NOTHING come forth from Congress, or these particular Players.  As President, they can do Nothing but ask others to "propose" bills.

meanwhile . . .Oct. 2nd Fairbanks Alaska, first day NOT above Freezing, Last time it was this COLD this SOON for the onslaught of WINTER was about 60 years ago? 100 yrs?, average First day below 32 degress is Oct. 11th 

The Republican Revolution will not be Televised

oh, snap!

That showed me, JWF.

Now, as to what I actually said: isn't it interesting that both campaigns have admitted that global warming/climate change is real and that we have to do something about it?

Or, to put it another way: who are you going to support this November--the candidate who believes global warming is real and want to do something about it or... ?

(Anyway, JWF, obviously we disagree on many political issues, but do you really think it helps when you add personal attacks? Well, just in case I start to call you names later, I'll just say now: thanks for your service in the Navy. Because of people like you and my high school and college friends who went ROTC, Army, Navy or (in one case) Air Force, we live in a country where people can express their opinions freely. So, thank you for protecting our right to disagree with each other. I look forward to disagreeing with you in the future, though I hope we can keep the conversation clean--less personal attacks, more arguing about the issues.)

What do they want to do?

"both campaigns have admitted that global warming/climate change is real"

EVERYONE admits that the climate changes! What the different campaigns do NOT agree on is the level of HUMAN INDUCED variances in the climate and what should be "done about it."

Obama: My job is above my pay grade

What they want to do: cap-and-trade, reduce carbon emissions

Hey Cobra,

First, not everyone on this board seems to admit that climate change is a real issue. (I mean, everyone agrees that weather changes, but some people here don't admit that the climate is changing.) So I think that case still needs to be made.

But, since you seem to accept climate change is an issue, let's go on to the next topic: what causes it and what do we have to do to keep the earth habitable.

Quick guessing game: which candidate's website says this:

"...the preponderance of scientific evidence points to the warming of
our climate from the burning of fossil fuels. We can no longer deny our
responsibility to lead the world in reducing our carbon emissions.

... through a
cap-and-trade system that sets clear limits on all greenhouse gases,
while also allowing the sale of rights to excess emissions."

Now, that sounds like Obama, right? (And in fact, the cap-and-trade system is also in Obama's platform.) But in fact, those statements are from the McCain/Palin website ( http://www.johnmccai... ).

So it looks like all the candidates agree: climate change is real; climate change is largely man-made, largely due to fossil fuels; and the way to deal with it is to reduce our carbon emissions. They may differ in some of the numbers (like what percent of carbon emissions they want reduced in how many years), but they share the same beliefs.

Nic Nic You think a Law coming from Congress can Fix it ?

Congress can't FIX the Climate by passing a Law that suddenly addresses the Lack of Sun Spot activity and makes us feel Safe . . After this Years COLD winter,  your Baloney will be recognized for what it is.

Congress wasn't around to STOP the LAST ICE AGE . . . . and NIC NIC why don't you ANSWER the one Question that AL  GORE will NOT answer .....

WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE BY VOLUME OF CO2 IN THE ATMOSPHERE OF PLANET EARTH TODAY ? ? ?

IT'S A EASY QUESTION, WHAT IS THE ANSWER ?

bwah?

Hi Jay,

I think you misunderstand my point. Which is simply this:

Both candidates have a common basis for understanding climate change: both Obama and McCain think that climate change is real, they think it is largely man-made, and they plan on instituting some changes to reduce our carbon emissions.

That's all I was pointing out.

I am NOT arguing that climate change is real (although I think it may be--also, to be clear, it's change, not warming--cold winters don't disprove it); and I am NOT going to act as a spokesman for Al Gore.

(For the record, I never claimed anything about climate change in this thread--I never claimed to be an expert. I only meant to point out how close Obama and McCain are on this issue.)

Hi Nic NIC ....you misunderstand (like I did U) the positions

The Political Positions on Climate change ARE  . . . Do not give those votes to the other candidate by bad mouthing Climate change . . . .

that is WHY Obama and McCain agree on Climate change, no other reason.

Congress Agreed that the CRA and Affirmative Action would give the "people who can't afford Houses", houses . . and assured us that nothing BAD would happen . . . Truth in lending ? ?

So Congress can't be trusted to FIX Global warming, Healthcare, the Iraq War (unless you want to lose) etc. . . . Until such time as we FIX the Pelosi and Reid Leadership of the non performing Congress. 

The Republican Revolution will not be Televised

Don't forget, Cheniere

Don't forget, Cheniere Caminada 1893 and the Florida Keys 1935. 

Limited Disclosure:  I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.

danbo

I should have researched a list but it would take hours. Those two are better than Houston. Galveston also. Florida is like the bullseye on a hurricane map. I remember the Saints glasses.

Weird weather

"the weather becoming weirder and more extreme--more hurricanes, tornadoes, out-of-season temperatures."

More extreme? Out-of-season? Above and below average occurrences? Been there, seen that.

I've experanced all kinds of "extremes" and "out-of-season" weather during my life. I've seen droughts followed by floods, late-spring snow, early-fall frosts, winter lighting storms (you don‘t see THAT very often!) , 10 degrees below zero temperature in Decembers followed by 60 above in January (we call that Indian Summer). I've seen a major blizzard on Halloween (October 31, 1991, rain followed by sleet followed by 26 inches snow, all within an eight to ten hour period! Oh, and the weather "experts" predicted "up to" 6 to 8 inches just a few hours prior to the start of what they described as a "minor" storm. God job, "experts," you really nailed that one) followed by a less than average snowfall for the rest of the season. I've seen dozens of tornados rip across my state one year and then not see a single report of one for the next. I've even seen a tornado disappear right in front of me (talk about WEIRD! There was a strong, cold downdraft and the tornado just broke apart like it was a puff of smoke!). I'd say I've pretty much seen just about everything that the weather can produce (except for hurricanes, which I am NOT eager to experience, thank you very much!) and that's only within the State of Minnesota over the last 40 years or so.

Global Warming? Yea, I've seen it, along with Global Cooling and Global Average. Wait a few more years and I'll see it all again, over and over, just as it has been occurring for million and billions of years.

We have a saying here in Minnesota: Don't like the weather? Wait a week or two and it'll change to something more to your liking. I guarantee it. I could say something similar to the Global Climate Crisis believers: Don't like the current climate? Wait a few years and it will change to something more to your liking. I guarantee it.

Obama: My job is above my pay grade

Yep. That's why we never

Yep. That's why we never had unusual climate. Like the climate disasters of 535-6 and 1816. Anee were no hurricanes in the 1800's.

Limited Disclosure:  I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.

strawman much?

Danbo,

that's a strawman argument--I'm not an expert on the controversy over climate change, but I don't think you're going to find anyone say that weather wasn't occasionally extreme throughout history.

(I also think it's a bad argument on your part to say that weather has been extreme before, and cherry-pick a few examples out of the past 1500 years. 1500 years is enough time for a lot of things to happen. People who argue that climate change is real do not deny that the weather has occasionally been extreme--but they probably would argue that the increased extreme weather in our lifetime is statistically important.)

Talking about cherry

Talking about cherry picking. AGWers are the kings of cherry pickers they look only at what they want and ignore or pretend inconvenient facts as the climate crises I mentioned. (Both extreme cold. The real killers.) also the MWP and LIA, plistocene, RWP. Anthropogenic global warming thesis routinely acknowledge warmers periods and colder periods then pretend they don't exist. 

Limited Disclosure:  I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.

but your case's still not presented as strongly as it could be

hey Danbo,

As I said, I haven't studied the climate change issue as much as I might have; so, I'm really not the guy to defend anthropogenic theories of climate change. I can believe you when you say that climate change proponents cherry-pick their examples, ignoring some facts that are inconvenient.

But that's hardly a defense of your own cherry-picking (or what looks like cherry-picking when you pick out various little ice ages throughout history).

I would recommend maybe saying first what you said in this post: anthropogenic theories don't account for these historical periods--and then present the examples. That way it looks like your overarching argument fuels your examples (which are intuitively convincing--clearly factory-produced waste didn't affect the MWP). Just my two cents about this argument.

(Also, do you feel a little, well, betrayed, that the Republican platform this year not only admits global warming, but admits man's (partial) role in it?)

The Political positions on the never mentioned Global Warming

The Political Positions on Climate change ARE  . . . Do not give those votes to the other candidate by bad mouthing Climate change . . . .

that is WHY Obama and McCain agree on Climate change, no other reason.

We all agree.

 Nicotene Nicostain is a lying liar and has no honor.

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

JWF

I find it interesting that "global warming" let up just about the time BHO supposedly quit smoking...perhaps he has single handedly saved the world.

Be cold. Be very cold!

Prepare to Bundle up boys and girls.

It is going to be very cold.

It is going to be very cold. The squirrels around here are burying all the nuts rhey can find. Trolls better hide.

Cooling is warming

Here's one thing you can take to the bank - the global warming alarmists will claim that the economic slowdown we experience over the next year or two will be the cause of the cooling that'll happen {or rather, continue to happen} over the coming years.

If some predictions for solar inactivity come to pass, we may experience major cooling over the next 30-50 years, way beyond any recent concessions made by the alarmists that warming will slow down for a decade. Expect the alarmists to twist their arguments into pretzels in order to keep up their fantasy movement while demanding ever greater interventions into our economic well-being, all to save the planet from their frenzied imaginary visions of doom.

No matter what happens to the climate, mankind will be blamed with never-ending strident calls to 'fix' a non-problem that has no solution.

 

Remember. During the

Remember. During the econimic slow down called the great depression, there was global warming.

They'll try to blame it on man. Man is a two bit player in climate. 

Limited Disclosure:  I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.

Global Warming

Will some one call the National Weather service and have them send me some of that Global Warming; 30 degrees and 16 inches of snow on the ground and still snowing, trees down all over town. Send me some of those tree huggers too they can shake the snow off.

Out sourcing is better

"Will some one call the National Weather service and have them send me some of that Global Warming;"

Anything ordered from the government will be pricey and take forever to get to you. I'd check ebay first. Next day delivery too. Last year I ordered some mortar rounds from the DoD and I'm still waiting.

These campaigns must kill

These campaigns must kill the die-hard Ecofascists. Just the flying to and from these rallies must put enough carbon in the air to push global warming to the brink. Both candidates are crazy on this issue, so maybe it's best we don't hear about it.

Why Obama Scares The Crap Out Of Me

 

 

Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/