Record cold debunks global warming? Not so fast…

9 comments

A sign of things to come?


I’ve heard it.  You’ve probably heard it.  Someone you know, when it is 10 degrees outside and snowing, says, “Well, where’s that global warming now??”.

As you try to fight off the urge to punch them in the throat, try to take a breath…count to 10…and calmly explain to them that global warming cannot be proven, or dis-proven, by single events, or even periods that seem to support it or discredit it.  Record heat waves in the summer do not mean it is absolutely, positively occurring…just like record cold and snow in the winter does not mean it is a myth.

Global warming is complicated, and I cannot begin to try and explain all of the complexities involved.

So, how about letting someone else do the talking? 🙂

Again…this does not PROVE anything.  It is just an example of how extreme weather might indicate something totally opposite of what you might think.

Banner
  • New Independent

    Now you know how WE feel! Although I have never wanted to punch anyone in the neck, I have been extremely irritated by every numbskull from Hollywood to DC shouting “GLOBAL WARMING…GLOBAL WARMING” about every thing. Would everyone PLEASE just step back and take a look at history? Wasn’t grapes once grown in Germany? Wasn’t people ice skating on the Thames River?

    It should be embarrassing for any true scientist to suggest “climate change” is anything new. I doubt any true scientists do—just those bought and paid for by special interests.

    And even more telling should be the ways they suggest “fixing” it. Reducing carbon emission? Nope. Just imposing a tax—and on guess who? China? India? Nope. Just America.

    And the lemmings who think they’ll get a free ride somehow are just a following along.

    Glad to hear that you sound sensible about the whole situation. One event—or even a dozen events—doesn’t tell the whole story. I have in my hands, right now, and article in the February 2011 edition of “The Kentucky Explorer” that tells of the “roughest on record” winters of 1976-1977 and 1977-1978 by Bob Smith, Editor-Publisher of The Three Forks Tradition newspaper.

    Thanks much.

  • http://www.morganminute.com/nighthawk/ nighthawk

    Well Dave… I guess that I’m one that you’d be counting to 10 around… lol
    Could be that you already do, as you haven’t cyber-punched me yet…🙂

    I have to agree with New Independent here.

    I should also point out that the more “carbon emissions” the better for
    the greenery that breaths it, the same way that we breath oxygen.
    Do they still teach this in 1st grade Elementary Science?

    Personally, as you might be able to tell, I don’t buy into the scheme.

    First they said it was global warming.

    Then winter come along and they said it was global cooling.

    Finally they decided to label it “climate change”.

    I think it has to do with the natural magnet pole fluctuations, and that with those natural occurrences, the government is trying to scare us to the point of wanting more taxation.

    Of course we are talking about a bunch that caused it to rain radiation from the steam clouds arising from the Maxey Flat evaporator in the 70’s.
    Not to mention the overhead nuclear testing that was being done down south
    upon US soil (suspiciously close to AREA 51) also during the 1970’s.

    Could it be that they are still testing nukes down there and just not telling us about it — explaining the effects away with a fairy tale about “climate change”?
    Wonder what could be causing all of the inland hurricane activity of the last decade or so? Advanced nuke testing or something?

  • admin

    well, i think you guys SORT of took it a little farther than i had intended, because i absolutely believe we are contributing to global warming, and my fear is that we haven’t even scratched the surface of everything there is to know about it yet.

    i understand that it is awfully hard to try to convince people that we need broad, sweeping changes, based on what some say is incomplete evidence, at best.

    i guess, for me, it just comes down to being better stewards of the planet, whether we’re causing global warming or not…and i’m sure not one to talk, as i KNOW i don’t do enough for my part.

    i feel like the evidence DOES suggest we are causing global warming…and so i find it especially annoying when folks say, “where’s that global warming, now?”…when we have an especially harsh winter…when, as the article suggests, these harsh winters may just BE the sign that global warming is happening. not just the harsh winter…but combined with the fact that arctic ice is virtually nonexistent in places where it is usually found this time of year, and it starts to get a bit concerning.

    i’m not for laying all the burden on all of us all at once….but i will tell you, if we don’t start making plans for a different kind of future, i can guarantee you the burden will be MUCH harder to bear later on.

  • http://www.morganminute.com/nighthawk/ nighthawk

    To simplify and crunch everything from my prior post
    into more reasonable/intelligible statement…

    Read what I have posted above and then consider;

    IF there is such a thing as “climate change” then it more
    than likely isn’t being caused by “we”, but rather by the
    combination of reckless government actions, such as open
    above ground/below sea nuke testing, etc… combined with
    loose “government” regulation upon large industry while
    imposing tighter regulations upon “we” (the people).

    Personally, I cant see an “Effect” of what they are calling
    (collectively) “climate change” without a plausible cause
    of those effects being caused by government actions.

    Shoot through the earth’s atmosphere with a rocket and you
    end up with a hole in the atmosphere. Shoot another rocket
    and you have another hole, and so on…

    Turn radioactive contaminated water into steam and pipe it
    up into the atmosphere for years and the atmosphere is going
    to become affected / infected with radiation…

    Test nukes above the ground, you are affecting / infecting
    the atmosphere.

    I can see a possibility of a “greenhouse effect” eventually
    occurring IF they keep punching holes in the atmosphere by
    shooting giant bullets (rockets) through and rupturing it
    until the point where the atmosphere finally collapses.

    I can see the ongoing testing of nuclear weapons over land
    and above and below the seas causing extreme weather changes.

    What I can’t see how they can even begin to blame the power plants.
    The nastiest power plant is still cleaner than the days of old
    when every family burned a fire to cook, keep warm, burned lamps
    to see after dark. — Now fewer and fewer people have to light up
    the fireplace or the even a wood cook stove on a daily basis.
    Fewer and fewer people even fire up a Kerosene lamp.

    So it isn’t “we” who could be causing “global warming” or whatever
    the politically correct name is today. “We” have cut back.
    The power plants still burn “dirty fuels”, but after taking into
    consideration that the power plants can supply more people with
    light, heat & cooking energy with far less of a “carbon footprint”
    than if each and every family were burning “dirty fuels”, then
    the “dirty fuels” argument sort of loses its credibility.
    Instead it being the “we” who should be coming under scrutiny, it
    should be the government and the governments actions brought
    under that scrutiny.

    And even though you may not totally agree with me, I think that
    you understand my standpoint and agree with me a little bit.

  • New Independent

    Admin: I wish I always had the strength to respond in the manner with which this Senator responded. You can see the smug self satisfaction in the reporter/man’s face even as the Senator was handing him his behind. Utterly clueless.

    And the young ladies probably didn’t hear a word the Senator said through their zombie-like determination to give their brainwashed statements.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sen-inhofe-deftly-handles-attempted-ambush-by-fake-politico-reporter/

  • New Independent

    Nighthawk: You lost me a bit somewhere there in the atmosphere. I guess I supposed the atmosphere is rather like the ocean and that you can’t actually shoot a hole through it. Could be wrong. You have any links with info?

  • http://www.morganminute.com/nighthawk/ nighthawk

    Well, no. — :/ —
    But with the scientific community’s spewing of “aerosols are eating up the ozone layer” from back in the 1970’s, I figured that rocket propellant cutting through the same ozone layer would cause similar, if not worse effects.

    I mean… If a little ole can of hairspray is going to destroy the atmosphere, then surely decades of nuclear weapons testing, rocket launching, and the injection of radioactive waste isn’t going to be very healthy for it.

    I’m sure I could dig up some links to support my theory, just the same as the scientific community dig up links to support their theories, but I really didn’t see any sense in backing up my theory by linking to others who share the same theory, because after all… It’s all theory.

    But, nevertheless, here are some links:
    ( Remove spaces around the dot(s) )

    aerospaceweb . org/question/spacecraft/q0298a.shtml
    news . nationalgeographic . com/news/2009/04/090414-rockets-ozone.html
    ratical . org/co-globalize/HAARPbg.html (Detailed, includes nuke testing)

    I don’t know how many (if any) links this site will allow me to post before my reply is placed into pending comments or is censored as spam.

    I don’t even know if this reply will display AS-IS, but just copy the
    links and paste them into your address bar (removing any spaces).

    I know that there are other sources to support my theory, which after
    a few minutes of research, I have discovered that is a common theory
    among many others. So if you need more links, feel free to ask.

  • http://www.morganminute.com/nighthawk/ nighthawk

    Oh yea! I just about forgot to add that I don’t buy into the whole “Climate Change” / “Global Warming” facade for raising taxes…

    It’s just that if the Taxadors (taxing-crusaders) want to hype up a fictitious reason to create stupid legislation (such as a Methane Tax), then I am smart enough to see through the fiction, tell them to go fly a kite, and cut government spending as a means of funding their pet project of solving a fictitious problem.

    Just as I said in an earlier post, I believe that what they are calling “climate change” is an ongoing event of natural cycles. (lack of better words atm)

  • http://www.morganminute.com/nighthawk/ nighthawk

    What I am trying to say is when the government starts trying to invent reasons to raise taxes… When they start relying upon mere theories, and treating those theories as if they are fact… And then try to blame the people by naming us as the cause of those fictitious-facts… WE Need To Be Prepared To Call Them Up And Place The Blame Right Back Upon The Government.

    Our answer to bogus taxation should be “You (The Government) Created The Problem, You Fix It!” and we should educate ourselves enough to be able to hold up our standpoint under heated debate.

    We should be able to use their own data against them should they attempt to raise taxes based upon theory.

    Of course they might say “But we was wrong back when that that study…”
    So we should be able to point out exactly how the new data could be equally wrong.

    Man! The more I write, the more I feel like I am eroding away from my point.

    I’m going to take a break from this little text-box for a while. 🙂