It's silly to use a single day / period of time to refute Global Warming. Many on the GW side appear to think that the rise in temperature is measured in several degrees fahrenheit when in reality it's fractions of a degree centigrade over decades. That, and we cannot even agree on where to take the temperature (1, 2, 5 or 50 meters?).

I'm one of those who actually believe the earth is getting warmer, that humans have something to do with it, but don't give a damn as it appears that warmer climates benefit life, that it will eventually start cooling again, and that if we did everything possible to stop our involvement we'd simply be sitting around rubbing sticks together for fire and eating grass and yet the temperature would still continue to rise, save .03°c or so.

And playing with dead animals is an unalienable right to all Americans, dammit..

I remember in the late '70s and early '80s being told, in no uncertain terms, that a new ice age was almost upon us. WOnder if it was the same climate guys.

*** Conservatives snickering at global warming during any given cold snap are operating at about the same logical level as leftists that break out the "Bush lied!" canard. Both annoy me a great deal.

So true.

It has been freakin' warm this winter. I'd like some snow.

I don't see how we can know that global warming (no matter the cause) will not cause more hardship than benefit. I think it's gonna suck, personally.

I remember in the late '70s and early '80s being told, in no uncertain terms, that a new ice age was almost upon us. WOnder if it was the same climate guys.

media hype exist then and exists now, but the underlying science behind those predictions - that showed a cooling trend - was not incorrect. The extrapolations to a new ice age were. Thus, your comment is a bit imprecise as it conflates the media with scientists, and conflates cooling predictions 30 years ago, working from different premise data, with warming predictions now, using both different data and computer models that are exponentially more sophisticated than what was available 30 years ago.

but the underlying science behind those predictions - that showed a cooling trend - was not incorrect.

Hence why I beleive the Earth is warming and still don't give a damn.

You don't give a damn if your house in Tampa is under water in 15-20 years?

The 70's data on cooling was based on the idea (and practice, from certain data, I believe), that increased pollution blocked UV.

But any cooling effect from this trend would apparently be swamped by greenhouse gases eating the ozone layer, which is theoretically causing the earth to heat at a faster rate, and which has ostensibly gained a ton of momentum in the past generation or so. Even if the change is a natural shift unrelated to man's activity, it's possible that the change could be drastic, catastrophic, because, well, mother nature just doesn't give a fuck.

It gets annoying when interpretation of the science morphs into a liberal/conservative pissing match unrelated to contextual, dry analysis.

My uncle has done extensive tree ring research all along the northern hemisphere, including Mongolia and Siberia and Archangel. Yes, the earth is warmer than it has been in the last five hundred years. But even he says the causes of why the earth is warming up are not clear.

The earth has been warmer in the past, even within the last thousand years (and definitely in the dinosaur ages.)

We just don't know enough about how the earth operates over long periods of time to guess about things such as ocean currents and jet streams and the like. Then there are things like giant volcanoe explosions, which pump enough stuff into the atmosphere for a significant cooling for a few years. Haven't had one of those since the early 1800s. And there's also the magnetosphere. Apparently we are overdue for the earth's magnetic poles to flip, and there has been a, IIRC, 10% decrease in the magnetic field's strength which could presage a flip, and allow more solar radiation into the earth.

We'll grow oranges in Alaska!

I agree that there are a lot of what-ifs. But as computer models improve dramatically with improvements in processing speeds, forecasting may get a bit more relevant.

Conservatives snickering at global warming during any given cold snap...

Who said humor was logical? Unfunny, perhaps, but no one expects humorists to study logic. Now, if you are one of those who think global warming is a big deal, well then, YMMV.

It's both not funny (at the very least, anything that overused stopped being funny a long time ago), as well as often not presented as a "joke," rather a snide "point" or at least semi-serious argument. Depending on the context, it can be sort of ignorant.

Which furthers my stated parallel to leftist logic regarding Bush's "lies," come to think of it.

But as computer models improve dramatically with improvements in processing speeds, forecasting may get a bit more relevant.

I think useful models are 10-20 years out. Both because of the science that needs to be done as input to the models, and because the needed cpu cycles aren't yet available. At this point we are just stacking up furlongs of printouts, so to speak.

But even if humans should turn out to have some significant impact should we worry? Trying to micromanage weather strikes me as a bit silly, especially given the wide swings in temperatures that have taken place in the millenia before people got involved. What happens when the temperature starts going down again, do we all put out smudge pots? I suspect the whole climate thingee will rightly become the subject of future satire.

Bill, to date there are no global climate models that correctly predict the past temperatures we've seen when given observed starting points. There is no reason to trust any results of any current models.

The only conservative I've read lately who snickers about cold snaps is Tim Blair. I find his snickering very funny, but then I'm very childish.

I'd like specifics about how Steyn is overrated, if you have any handy. I like him.

Steyn wrote an entire column snickering about cold snaps, for one. Tim Blair IS funny as hell, on that we agree. As for others, go to technorati the next press release about global warming or it's a record cold temp somewhere, and enter the link. There should be about 2 dozen conservative blogs doing the same schtick; it's like clockwork. Paul from Wizbang. Ace and one of his co-bloggers did it within the past 30 days. I didn't provide links because I don't feel like throwing more enemies on the woodpile.

As for why I find Steyn overrated, I think that he oversimplifies and presses the clash of civilizations meme (and by presses, I mean writes the same column over and over again), and beyond that, nothing specific. I just never got why people love him so much; I don't think he's bad, he just fails to inspire me.

Bill, my house in Tampa will not be underwater in 10-15 years because of my SUV, period. So no, I don't give a fuck. I've been whacked with 4 hurricanes in 2 years - I worry about them more than the fricken' ocean rising 30 or 40 feet. That's the kind of hysterics that make me want to roast baby seals over used motor oil.

As a computer programmer, I hate to tell you this, but models are just that - models. You can't live in a model house, drive a model car, or even date a model. They are approximations of events or real things and even at billions of calculations per second (or trillions if you chain 'em together), they still cannot represent an entire planet's weather system. It takes every last bit of computing power we have at our fingertips just to try to map a single gene!

Yes, weather prediction has gotten better over the years, much in the same way microwave dinners have improved over TV-dinners. They still suck, just not quite as bad. But even with their improvements, I don't trust the local weather report for next week (as it's usually off), why should I think we can gauge the weather in the next 100 years?

Look, I think most conservatives are on the wrong side of environmentalism. This is where we have to live. There's nothing wrong with trying to keep things clean, setting aside tracts of land for everyone to enjoy, or doing our best to protect wildlife. Conversely, we can't keep things 100% clean, save all the land, and ensure the continued survival of the eastern pygmy marmoset at the cost of human lives.

But I've read the data, I've looked at the models (admittedly, I have very little understanding of them outside of what the authors tell me) and all I see are a trillion variables that we're not exactly sure, but if 1....n are met exactly like so, we have a problem. And logically it just doesn't appear that humans have control of enough of those variables to matter.

But to your point

it's possible that the change could be drastic, catastrophic, because, well, mother nature just doesn't give a fuck.

It's also possible that the change could be beneficial to life in general. That the increase in temperature allows more plant life to grow, feeding more people. Many animals would die off, but those who could stand the heat would not only get to stay in the kitchen but would even get promoted to head chef. It's also possible the increase in plant life eventually offsets the CO2 bringing Gaia back into harmony and balance.

It's also possible that they bring back 'Airwolf' and cast Hugh Laurie as Stringfellow Hawke, but I ain't holding my breath.

Excerpt from my company's in-house meteorologist's most recent email, for no particular reason:

-Cincinnati recorded their warmest January since 1890 making it the 4th warmest January ever..avg temp was 41.6 degrees
-Chicago recorded their third warmest January ever with an avg temp of 35.8 degrees….every day in the month of January was above normal !!!
-Kansas City recorded their warmest January on record with an avg temp of 42.7 degrees…the high temperature has eclipsed 60 six times and 50 degrees twenty four times since late December
-Arkansas recorded their second warmest January on record with an avg. temp of 48.2 degrees
-Milwaukee recorded their second warmest January on recorded with an avg. temp of 34.0 degrees
-Philadelphia recorded their 9th warmest January on record with an avg. temp of 40.7 degrees which was 8.4 degrees above normal
-Central Park recorded their third warmest January on record with an avg. temp of 40.9 degrees

We've had a really warm year here in Toledo, too. After a very cold December.
The question is, is the last hundred years supposed to be the norm? What if we've been in a fluky stable moderate period that is long term unstable even without humans?

Marble -

I worry about them more than the fricken' ocean rising 30 or 40 feet. That's the kind of hysterics that make me want to roast baby seals over used motor oil.

I lived about 2 hours south of you for about 20+ years, and the house I grew up in was below sea level. A five foot storm surge could flood us. So I'm not sure where you get "30 or 40 feet." You're not in Denver, dude.

I was also using a bit of license, and have no opinion that global warming is GOING to cause these things to happen, though some models that you don't put stock in do indeed show the coast of Florida going away. BTW, those hurricane models have gotten a lot better, eh?

Again, I don't put forth strong opinions on global warming either way, because it takes a good deal of study and applied knowledge to cut through all of the bullshit and write intelligently about it. I'm not an alarmist, though I do think that you underplay how bad it could be with a 2-3 degree rise in temperature, not the least of which is that it may be contributing to the hurricane seasons. (yes, yes, I know the conservative gospel that "it's just cyclical over generations!")

It's also possible that the change could be beneficial to life in general.

sure. It's also possible, that in human terms, as far as the REAL impact to societies, governments, world economics, your brief stint of life on this planet, it could be pretty bad, and to be selfish, I don't give a crap whether Inuits gain the wonder of an extended fall. That point is abstract - Tsunamis and hurricanes are good examples of how natural events and changes disrupt fragile economies and other human paradigms. If certain portions of the coastal/southern United States became less habitable, the economic/demographic impacts would be pretty relevant. It's easy to dismiss these things in the macro - "hey, we'll adapt!" - but there could be a lot of pain in the details.

As for computing power ...

It takes every last bit of computing power we have at our fingertips just to try to map a single gene!

From memory, within about 12 years, it's anticipated that we'll be able to do an entire person's DNA for an affordable cost. Reverse engineer the entire human brain within 20(?) or so. The models are getting better every year, as processing power doubles every 18 (effective 24) months or so. So while I do NOT think that global warming models are even close to gospel, I'm fairly confident that at some point, they will be.

Again, don't get into a debate with me based on the premise that we disagree all that much, or that I'm endorsing global warming alarmism. I'd say the only thing that I disagree with you on is that you don't seem to acknowledge the impact of the worse scenarios. I guess we'll see in 2-3 decades.

No, I understand the impact of the worst case scenarios, it's that I undervalue the opinion that those are going to be the case and even if they are that, at this point, we do not have enough data / computing power to prove that humans have all that much to do with it in the first place.

And sorry about the 30 -40 foot comment. I live in Brandon, not Tampa. I'm not even in a flood zone. I was talking about sustained sea level rises, not just storm surge. If either hits my house, mankind in Florida is pretty much screwed anyway.

I guess we'll see in 2-3 decades.

Which is my point. It's not that next year the ice caps will dislodge themselves and float down here to the Gulf. This is a sloooooow process that allows humans time to adapt. Sure Tsunamis happen (and surprisingly a lot of people blamed the recent one on GW*!), sure earthquakes happen, sure comets smashing into Wyoming happen and yes there's pain. But is driving my SUV and eating Quizno's Chili from a Styrofoam cup really the cause? And can we as humans learn to adapt, especially if we can start judging the weather more accurately, longer out, and faster? Won't that same technological magic help us prepare?

*Actually, you could interpret this as George W. or Global Warming. Both were blamed for something that happened thousands of feet below the surface of the earth. Damn that Chimpy McHalliburton and his Earth Control Machine!

*** Leftists warning of global warming during any given warm spell are operating at about the same logical level as leftists that break out the "Bush lied!" canard. Both annoy me a great deal.

Of course, Leftists like Al Gore warning of global warming during any given cold spell, as he does annually, well, that's just plain amusing.

About the sea level: "No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.
--IPCC TAR (Third Assessment Report), 2001"

We're in an interglacial. Sea levels rise until the next glaciation. Then they don't. But it hasn't sped up.

OK Chris Horner, how about this article published in Geophysical Research Letters. I'll see your 2001 report and raise it by January 2006.

Hell, I can one up both of youse guys. This morning, the bay was much higher than it was just yesterday on the way home!!!!!

Hell, I can one up both of youse guys. This morning, the bay was much higher than it was just yesterday on the way home!!!!!

LOL

Head for the hills, the end is nigh - watery death is upon us. Run!

Here in Toledo we've just had our third warmest January since we've been keeping track. (The only warmer ones were 1890 & 1932). And it's been the first January since 1971 to record no homicides. Coincidence, or does global warming cut down on murders?

It's too damn hot to go akilling. Pass the lemonade.

Rob: I live in a model house, drive a model car and even date a model. Shows what you know.

ionolsen20 Best site I see. Thanks.www_4_2
www_4_3
www_4_4
www_4_5
www_4_6
www_4_7
www_4_8
www_4_9
www_4_10
www_4_11

ionolsen33 Great website! Bookmarked! I am impressed at your work! www_4_1
www_4_2
www_4_3
www_4_4
www_4_5
www_4_6
www_4_7
www_4_8
www_4_9
www_4_10
www_4_11

ionolsen40 Great website! Bookmarked! I am impressed at your work! WFVT 55 cdfe

generic viagra .

http://www.websjapan.com/articles/tits.html

f9b8826ce4d7 Very good shorturl shorturl

oepys yxzlsrng gjsbdiyc jexzoufv myzecx epcvnghjd wgmoyudr