Conservatives Use "Snowmageddon" to Mock Global Warming

[sabra]

Source: CBS News

Conservative congressmen are using Washington's serious snow storm (known as "snowmageddon" or "snowpocalypse") to mock those who say the government should act to curb global warming, and at least one Democrat says the storm could actually set back progress on an energy and climate bill.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) took to the social networking site Twitter to mock former Vice President Al Gore over the storm: "It's going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries 'uncle,'" he tweeted yesterday.

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, also got in on the fun. He and his family built an igloo in Washington and adorned it with cardboard signs reading "Al Gore's new home" and "Honk if you global warming."

...

Meanwhile, the magazine Mother Jones reported earlier that the Virginia Republican party has capitalized on the snow by running an ad against Democratic Reps. Rick Boucher and Tom Periello for supporting cap-and-trade legislation.

The ad blasted the Democrats for voting to "kill tens of thousands of Virginia jobs just to stop ." It urges viewers to call the legislators and "and tell them how much global warming you get this weekend. Maybe they'll come help you shovel."

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/02/10/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6194071.shtml?tag=exclsv

[liberal N proud]

1. It should have never been called global warming for that very reason

Although it does demonstrate their stupidity.

[left coaster]

6. Absolutely agree!

The propagandists latch on to descriptives, like, "global warming", and use it to influence public opinion in situations like this.. I refuse to even use that term anymore.. 'Climate change' is better, and doesn't mislead the ignorant so easily..

[mortfrom]

13. Climate Change

Unfortunately while global warming is climate change, climate change is not necessarily global warming. Jupiter is undergoing climate change. The Inhofians use Jupiter's climate change to deny warming on Earth. Global warming *is* the problem, anthropogenic (?) global warming more specifically.

[FailureToCommunicate]

56. Global Climate Disruption. That's what Obama's Science Adviser calls it.

John Holdren makes the point that though it is global warming,the effect on many regions will be cooling and severe weather pattern shifts, causing more severe storms, drought in formerly wet areas... in other words DISRUPTION.

Maybe it should be called Climate Malfunction...

[onpatrol98]

57. Climate Malfunction

Climate Malfunction...that's too funny. Still a really bad thing to have happen, but still too funny.

[WriteDown]

79. I like "global cooling."

:)

[Xenotime]

120. Climate Disruption is the best term.

[Abq_Sarah]

11. it was called "global warmning" but that is what

The "consensus" at the time claimed would happen across the globe if greenhouse gasses weren't curbed.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. It's called global warming because that's what it is.

The globe is getting warmer.

You shouldn't have to beat around the bush because you're afraid some Republican might be mean to you.

[The Doctor.]

51. Yep. Unfortunately, too many people can't process "Heat=Energy"

So they think that 'snow' means 'no heat'.

Morons.

[Zoeisright]

2. They are so fucking stupid. Weather is not climate.

And global warming CREATES extreme weather conditions. God, you can't pound sense into them with a hammer.

[Jim__]

7. They are so fucking stupid. Period.

It's not limited to any one issue.

[rfranklin]

20. Sorry, I have to add an addenda...they are fucking stupid squared...

There, I said it.

[teknomanzer]

91. Willfully ignorant ideologues...

Standing in the middle of a snowstorm shouting, "See there is no global warming, its cold!" is the equivalent of pointing at the sky and saying, "See the sun is moving not the Earth. I can't even feel the earth move! The Sun moves around the earth just like the church says."

This is the religious and ideological crowd that has always denied scientific findings because it did not fit thier world view. Global warming does not fit and cannot be accepted when your whole ideology is based on "invisible hand" unlimited growth economics.

In the past the ideas of science were finally accepted but only after the "true believers" died off. But we may not have time to wait for these ignorant fools to die.

As I've said before don't worry about global warming the nuclear winter will fix it all.

[wroberts189]

104. They are fucking stupid ...But some are that way because of LYING SCUM ON FOX. nt

[YvonneCa]

29. THANK YOU. We teachers teach 10 year old children the difference...

...between weather and climate. It's really frightening that we have Senators that don't know the difference. GOOD GRIEF!!!

[fjc]

99. But I'd like to try.

[LogicDiagram]

112. Consider this additional data

Recently watched a program narrated by founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman.
While he doesn't dispute global warming, he reviews much of the data collection used to support it.
I feel the same way. There is global warming, but believe data gathered to support it has been skewed due to faulty measuring methods. Therefore, it opens up the entire science to criticized.

As an example, consider the poor grad student who files a thesis with data not properly measured. His thesis will be shot to pieces by his professors and, certainly, open to dispute.
In my background as an engineer, if the data used to arrive at a conclusion has weakness, you should expect criticism.
To see the program, Google "KUSI global warming the other side". It is shown in 5 video segments.

To those of you who may reply negatively: remember, I am not saying it doesn't exist. I am saying the data indicating the magnitude of global warming should be reviewed so those who will dismiss it can be shown otherwise. Calling someone the F-word is not an intelligent way to answer criticism.

[CatholicEdHead]

3. Not surprising

Go to the Minneapolis Startribune newspaper's comment section on any weather story and you get this knee jerk reaction against Global Warming, no matter what the weather is doing. :crazy:

[wellst0nev0ter]

62. Yeah, Last Month It Was Raining In Fricking January

Where were those global warming denialists then?

[maxsolomon]

4. as always, self-centered fear on display

if it was true (and it is), then there's no way for them to avoid blame for their behavior.

so it can't be true.

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Note to Jimbo and Jimbo -- Summer will be here before you know it

:evilgrin:

--d!

[ronnie624]

110. Yep. They will be singing a different tune in the coming years. n/t

[zeemike]

8. precipitation has little to do with cold air.

And a lot to do with warm air because it is the warm air that can hold the moisture....the colder the air the less water it contains.
someone needs to give them a science lesson.

[Guilded Lilly]

58. Ah...

but you see, they don't realllly believe in Science! Science challenges their political power base.

Unfortunately showing your ignorance to ignorancy-prone followers only magnifies the stupidity levels.
It is beyond sad how many will swallow this line of thinking and regurgitate it ad nauseum.

[saigon68]

105. Religious nut jobs

http://www.projectcreation.org/index.php

Just check this out

Somewhere I read 30% of amerikans believe humans and dinosaurs (T-Rex) co-existed at the same time.

[louis-t]

9. "Honk if you global warming"

I really hope that's what Inhofe actually wrote on the sign. Moran.

[SpiralHawk]

10. Ahhh, it's 'Global Climate Chaos' as anyone with half a brain knows

not that Republicons are capable of grasping the climate chaos already happening. They just don't care about their children or grandchildren. They are all about FEAR, FAIL & GREED NOW for themselves.

[Downwinder]

12. Customers for water front property? Have I got a deal for them.

Only problem, State Farm won't insure.

[rickford66]

14. a simple fact & some observations

If the Earth's total temperature is above 32 deg F, all the ice melts. 33 deg F is pretty cold and it will snow, just like last night when it was 34 deg F here.

I was in Antarctica for a year. It never snowed, too cold. The accumulation there was fine ice particles blowing in from warmer northern areas. Scientists were drilling ice cores there for atmospheric data.

I built a solar home and kept records of sunny and cloudy days. In the early 80's, January was cold with clear skies. Now it's warmer with overcast skies. We're using twice the wood for extra heat than we did 25 years ago. Using a snow storm to contradict scientific data is purely Republican.

[mrs_p]

24. good points

and welcome to DU!

:hi:

on edit: though i see you've been here a long time!!

[skepticscott]

31. Well, not quite

The Earth's total temperature (if by that you mean overall average) IS above 32F, and all the ice hasn't melted yet.

It never gets too cold to snow. And how could there possibly have been "accumulation" where you were just from drilling ice cores hundreds of miles away?

[rickford66]

41. reply to skepticscott

It didn't snow. There was some very fine flurries that would probably build up over millions of years, but what we saw was fine ice particles blowing in, not coming down. Hey, maybe I was too drunk, but I never saw snow coming down.

When people I know try to tell me there's no global warming because it's cold out, I like to tell them it only has to warm up to 33 deg F. At the rate were going, the sea level temp could reach that every where. Oh yah. Salt water freezes at a lower temp.

[rickford66]

42. Oops

The ice core drilling I observed (1969-1970) was for atmospheric data, probably used today. I didn't mean to imply any accumulation was caused by the drilling.

[zeemike]

78. Just one point.

Cold air is dry air...and if all you have is cold air with very little moisture in it you will have no snow....Antartica is the driest place on the earth because it is so cold...

[skepticscott]

93. Well, don't tell the people

in Washington or Philadelphia that cold air is dry air.

In any case, how does the (well-known to me) fact that Antarctica is very dry and does not get much actual snowfall change my point that it is never too cold to snow at all?

[zeemike]

96. Well it dose not change your point.

I was talking about the fact that the amount of snow is dependant on heat not cold....the warmer the air the more moisture it holds....and the differences in the temps of the warm and cold air mass determines how big the storm will be.
The energy of a storm comes from it's heat not it's cold.

[petronius]

115. Just for clarity, the vapor capacity of air diminishes with temperature. So, while

it's technically true that it's never too cold to snow at all, very cold air will be unable to produce anything more than a trace of frozen precipitation. Conversely, vapor capacity rises non-linearly with temperature, so as air is warmed to a temperature closer to the melting point its vapor capacity and therefore potential to produce large snowfalls increases. (Of course, moisture availability is the other piece of the equation...)

[daleo]

44. Interesting

January seems a lot more overcast to me than it used to, here on the Canadian prairies.

[n2doc]

15. Send the idiots this

And be sure to ask them "So, next summer when it is 105 in the shade in DC, will you be willing to sign on to Global warming, then?" Freaking idiots.

[lunatica]

27. LOL! I love the bonus!

Yup, you can measure and see the earth is flat!

[The Doctor.]

52. Send it around!

Frickin' simpletons.

[DCBob]

16. The sad fact is that this monster storm is very likely the direct effect of global warming..

But the clueless deniers will never get it.

[wisteria]

17. Exactly. n/t

[Imajika]

22. Please stop blaming isolated weather events...

..on Global Warming.

It really is counter productive. It is probably not true, and it has caused a backlash as people are very dubious of hearing that EVERYTHING is the fault of AGW.

After Katrina, far too many people trying to advance the effort to fight climate change said we'd have more active hurricane seasons and more intense tropical storms. It did NOT happen. Not yet anyway. Making these sorts of predictions and blaming isolated weather events on Global Warming is a terrible idea. We are just as guilty of foolishness as the "deniers" when we blame a winter storm on global warming.

Washington DC just barely broke it's all time seasonal snowfall record total today. The last time it snowed so much in a Winter season was 1898-1899. So what explains the 1898-1899 snowy season? You can bet for Washingtonians back then, many were running around blaming God, or humans, or someone or something else for their misfortune. People always want to blame bad weather or freak events on something, when in reality these things are perfectly natural, albeit rare, and normal. The previous several winters in DC there has been less snow than normal. So what explains that? Is that also AGW? So basically, when it snows it is the fault of Global Warming, when it doesn't it is also the fault of Global Warming. See how that can make people incredulous and suspicious?

Freak weather happens. Always has, always will. The climate IS changing. The climate has ALWAYS changed. The earth IS warming. Even the "skeptics" generally acknowledge this. There is also solid agreement that humans are contributing to changes in the climate, which have the effect of making it warmer overall. And this is the key, the general warming trend (that humans are accelerating) is not in some isolated area. As fast as it may be occurring in terms of the big picture (climate changes happening over thousands, tens of thousands and millions of years), it is still very gradual and will in some years appear to reverse itself. We can't even be sure that perhaps AGW will actually offset a normal climactic cooling trend at some point which ends up keeping the status quo, yet still altering the earth's normal climate by not allowing it to cool.

The point is, blaming big storms and unusual events is a pretty bad idea. Just like any other dangerous trend, people (particularly the media) like to bandwagon and blame everything on it. Those who want to fight man made climate change all too often want to blame weather events on AGW when it suits them to do so, then turn around and complain when deniers do the EXACT same thing.

This storm is probably not a direct effect of AGW. Sure, the climate changes, so therefore you can blame anything and everything weather related on the current climate, but in reality these recent East Coast storms are a result of a perfectly normal El Nino happening at the same time as an also perfectly normal high altitude blocking pattern over Greenland. It is rare they both occur at the same time, but they just do sometimes and it is not AGW that causes it.

[Dave From Canada]

26. Well said. Washington D.C. has had really bad snow storms like this before, just not in a

long time.

[DCBob]

32. When all-time records are broken that should get one's attention...

and we still have several weeks of winter left. We are likely to break the record by a large amount. Who knows if it these storms are the effect of global warming.. I am just saying its quite possible. What's really sickening ironic is that the deniers have effectively used this snowy winter to attack those trying to bring attention to the extremely critical issue of global warming.

[Imajika]

49. We agree on one of your points...

"What's really sickening ironic is that the deniers have effectively used this snowy winter to attack those trying to bring attention to the extremely critical issue of global warming."

While I don't know if I'd call it ironic because I don't believe the storms have anything much to do with AGW, I fully agree with you that it is maddening to watch people claiming a few East Coast snow events mean there is no Global Warming.

It is quite silly really when you think about it. I just know that many of these "deniers" are the kinds of folks whom would find one cold cubbyhole in the burning fires of hell and demand that everyone believe that hell is actually not hot at all.

This is why I say we should NOT go around blaming bad weather events or a few unusual seasons on AGW. When we do that, we are basically guilty of the same thing the skeptics and deniers do.

"When all-time records are broken that should get one's attention..."

See, I don't buy that. Seriously, records are broken, smashed, shattered, etc, etc, constantly. Always have been, probably always will be - at least until mankind has kept accurate records for thousands of years. Mother nature is awe inspiring and incredible, unusual, freakish weather is happening in many places the globe over, every single day of every single year.

AGW is just not something that we may even notice in our lifetimes. The effort to shock people into doing something about it by blaming every hurricane, snowstorm, wildfire, etc on it is counter productive.

The basic argument should be, in my opinion anyway, something very simple. Let's keep the earth clean and keep our footprint as small as possible. It is a win/win for mankind and the health of our planet. The earth may warm, the earth may cool, but lets keep it clean and not screw with its normal cycles.

[DCBob]

70. You dont believe global warming can cause stronger storms?

That has been one of basic predictions from the very beginning of GW theory. Heat is energy and can make stronger storms. Heat also increases the amount of moisture that can be held in the atmosphere which can cause more and stronger snow storms in the winter.

[Optical.Catalyst]

28. There is increased moisture over North America due to the El Nino in the Pacific

The intensity of the El Nino's have been increasing due to global warming. As odd as it may sound, snowfall in the North East is exacerbated by warming in the Pacific.

[Imajika]

40. Ugh, no...

Weak to moderate El Nino winters are associated with a snowy East Coast season, not strong ones.

Strong El Nino winters generally result in above average temperatures and precipitation which would result in more rain, not snow.

What we have had the last few storms on the East Coast is thought to be caused by a weak/moderate El Nino AND a blocking pattern over Greenland.

While you can probably blame everything weather related on the climate in some way, this really has little to nothing to do with AGW.

Bad winters happen. Period. Records are broken every day somewhere. As they say, records are made to be broken.

Yes, climate change is happening. Yes, humans are contributing to a warming of the atmosphere. No, most bad weather events are not the result of AGW.

Lastly, people whom don't believe in man made climate change because the East Coast happened to be snowy winter this season are either ignorant of the facts, or are choosing to ignore them. It is a silly to doubt AGW because of a few snowstorms as it is to blame every snowstorm on AGW.

[YvonneCa]

61. Exactly. n/t

[WriteDown]

80. It is?

Which giant storms when I was a kid in NY were caused by it too? All of them?

[DCBob]

86. Depending how old you are I doubt not many.

Global warming effects on weather and climate are more recent effects. Of course no one knows for sure if any particular storm or cluster of storms was caused by global warming but we do know warming of the atmosphere and the ocean can cause extremes in weather.

This particular winter has been devastating to the mid-atlantic regions and has broken all-time records... not for cold but for amount of precipitation... which can be an effect of global warming.

[Xipe Totec]

18. Please disseminate this rebuttal:

It gets pretty tiresome having to explain that climate change doesn't mean that every region of the world will turn into the Sahara Desert next week. But it seems like that's what it would take for many to appreciate the vast body of scientific evidence confirming man-caused climate change: Fox correspondents, GOP Senators (and their grandchildren!?), and climate skeptics of every stripe are reveling in the snowstorms that are battering the east, making the ever-sophisticated claim that 'snowfall disproves global warming.' Thank goodness at least one newscaster had the sense to point out how incredibly wrong that logic is. Video's after the jump.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7684672

[wisteria]

19. Doesn't DeMint have better things to do for his state then go around tweeting stupid things?

DeMint is an idiot along with Inhoff. They mock something they know nothing about. They turn a serious issue into a childish school yard taunt. I did read earlier in "The Hill" that Senator Kerry called them out on it, but it is going to take more than one Dem.to counter these a**holes. Their antics play very well with the uninformed and the Limbaugh listeners.

[sellitman]

21. All the Repiggies I know say the same thing

They are all ignorant and delusional.

I refuse to set them straight any more. It's hopeless.

[NickB79]

23. Warmer air holds more moisture, thus generating more snowfall

And the sea ice in the Arctic ocean hasn't recovered from last year's melt-off, so there's more open ocean to evaporate water vapor off of.

While you can't blame individual storms on global warming, this is consistent with what climate change models predict.

[lunatica]

25. Lalalalallalalllalalal! I can't hear you!

What Global Warming?

[HBravo]

33. How true.

:rofl:

[truthisfreedom]

34. It's called "Climate Change", you head-in-the-sand oil company sellouts.

You'll destroy the entire earth with your greed.

[golfguru]

35. I am sure man is causing some changes in climate...however

no one explains to me what caused the humongous global warming
some 12,000 years ago which ended the ice age and melted 3 mile
think layers of glaciers on top of Chicagoland and formed the
great lakes.

[DCBob]

38. There have always be changes in the climate, any idiot knows that.

and there are many factors that can cause it, one being humans use of fossil fuels that pump large amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

[daleo]

48. There are various theories

Greenhouse gas levels correlate very well with ice ages, though.

People have always gotten cancer, but smoking was a new factor in human cancer in the 20th century. The fact that cancer was not new in the 20th century doesn't mean that smoking didn't massively affect cancer rates.

Similarly for climate change. Earth's climate has always varied, but man's contribution is a new factor.

[golfguru]

59. My own theory is that ice age followed by global warming

has been going on for millions of years solely because of 1 overwhelming
reason.....SUN ACTIVITY. The sun gets its energy from nuclear fusion and
that activity is not constant but ebbs and rises in a sinusoidal wave form.

The sun is millions of times more powerful than all the fossil fuel energy
on earth. So I blame the cooling/warming cycles on Sun as a overwhelming factor.
Man will never overcome Sun's forces.

[KILL THE WISE ONE]

64. that theory may deserve another martini but …

i do not see a Nobel Prize in your near future.

[golfguru]

68. That theory is not new or original....so yes no trip to Norway

to accept the Nobel.

[hatrack]

90. NASA - Deep Solar Minimum - "The Quiietest Sun We've Seen In A Century"

Sorry, not a winner! Would you like to try again?

April 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower.

2008 was a bear. There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days: plot. Prompted by these numbers, some observers suggested that the solar cycle had hit bottom in 2008.

Maybe not. Sunspot counts for 2009 have dropped even lower. As of March 31st, there were no sunspots on 78 of the year's 90 days (87%).

It adds up to one inescapable conclusion: "We're experiencing a very deep solar minimum," says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center.

"This is the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century," agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.



http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm

Hottest January in UAH Satellite Record Human-Caused Global Warming Easily Overwhelms Much-Hyped "Cold Snap"



Yes, the mid-Atlantic region appears headed toward an epic snow storm as “amazing moisture feeds into what is already a gigantic system,” according to the Capital Weather Gang.

But while the anti-science crowd will no doubt tout that as evidence we aren’t warming — just as they did with the “cold snap” in early January — in fact, climate science predicts we will see more extreme precipitation events year-round as warming puts more moisture into the atmosphere .

Indeed, the January “cold snap” not only didn’t prove the case for (nonexistent) global cooling — it turns out that January was uber-hot around the globe! As leading anti-science guy Roy Spencer posted Thursday (including the figure above):

The global-average lower tropospheric temperature anomaly soared to +0.72 deg. C in January, 2010. This is the warmest January in the 32-year satellite-based data record….

Note the global-average warmth is approaching the warmth reached during the 1997-98 El Nino, which peaked in February of 1998.

Of course, right now we’re only in a moderate El Nino. In 97-98, we had a monster El Nino. And Spencer doesn’t mention that this record is especially impressive because we’re at “the deepest solar minimum in nearly a century.”

EDIT

http://climateprogress.org/2010/02/05/hottest-january-in-uah-satellite-record-roy-spencer-global-warming/

[petronius]

116. Variations in the sun's output are not ignored in climate science. However,

observed variations (and it's variations that matter here, not the the absolute magnitude) in luminosity at a variety of time scales are simply not of a sufficient magnitude to produce the observed variability in climate. Other factors - continental drift, orbital parameters, atmospheric composition, etc - are playing a larger role. Over the last half-century at least, the rise in global temperature can not be explained without the impact of the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gases.

The sun is the source of energy that drives the Earth system, and it certainly is the biggest and baddest thing in the Solar System, but it's a false conclusion to assume that just because it provides the underlying energy it must also be the sole source of internal variability - it's not even close to that...

[jimlup]

63. Natural climate cycles are normal and ...

We understand that changes in the earth's orbit and axis tilt are somewhat responsible for major climate shifts in the past.



This Vostok ice-core graph shows the cycle. The warming that you are describing is the onset of the last interglacial which we are currently in.

[golfguru]

66. Nice chart! eom

[lumpy]

121. Talk to the sun.

v

[lumpy]

122. Talk to volcanoes.

v

[fascisthunter]

36. that's the problem with Fanaticism

and those that are fanatics. You can't penetrate their minds with truth, they lock it out because they can't handle it.

[radiclib]

37. These cretins will never grasp the concept

-simply because it requires a thought 'process' that requires the ability to think an extra step beyond A to B. It's way too difficult for reptilian brains.
No offense to lizards.

[SoapBox]

39. Climate CHANGE!

...climate change...CLIMATE change...CLIMATE CHANGE!

*I'm screaming!*

[Chemical Bill]

43. Snowmageddon proves that Obama gets results.

Bush never did a thing about global warming! President Obama takes office, and it's cold and wet.

Bill

[tuvor]

45. It's called GLOBAL warming, not Washington warming. n/t

[Canuckistanian]

46. They're going to be sorry

20 years fom now, when they sit down with their grandchildren, they're going to get asked all kinds of embarrassing questions like, "Grandpa, why were you a Global Climate Change denier? The IPCC report was in 2007. Didn't you hear the news?"

[KT2000]

47. A Winger told me

she did not believe in global warming because the only thing that generates heat is the sun.
This level of ignorance is impossible to appease.

[HughMoran]

50. Morons

Sadly, there are DUers that agree with these dimwits.

[KillCapitalism]

53. Perhaps they should watch this movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0319262/

[Beartracks]

54. Oklahoma radio station DJs....

... (I won't mention Tulsa's KRMG by name) had a chuckle about that very thing today, as if heavy snow is antithetical to the idea of global warming. Seriously, is it so hard to understand that as average global temperature rises, wild weather swings -- both hot AND cold, both wet AND dry -- would be the result? It's a basic understanding of "how weather works" even WITHOUT global warming. If nothing else, even the most distracted person certainly knows the difference between "weather" and "climate," right?

You might argue about whether humans have had any role in global climate change, but as average temps slowly increase the results would NOT be "every place just gets simultaneously warmer." Inhofe does a disservice to science, just as these morning show guys do a disservice to their listeners by not calling Inhofe and other politicians on their misstatements about such simple concepts.

Anyhow, these heavy snows are likely caused by the strong El Nino currently in the Pacific, which I've heard (don't recall where) is an unusually strong one. Maybe THAT's the result of global warming; who knows? But it cheeves me off to see people who should know better griping that somehow the presence of some wintry weather somehow disproves global warming out-of-hand.

[No Elephants]

55. All together now: "Weather" does not equal "climate."

[twitomy]

92. Good. Now the next time its blistering hot in summertime

we wont hear people blaming it on "global warming" or "climate change" either, right? Afterall its just "weather" and weather doesnt equal "climate"

Just trying to be consistant.

[ronnie624]

111. No.

Erratic events of frozen precipitation are consistent with the models predicting climate change. Global warming translates into both more heat, as well as the kinetic energy which drives all storms, including those that occur in the winter. And the summers will most certainly tend to get hotter because of increased global warming.

[FailureToCommunicate]

60. Blast all the "Conservatives" into low earth orbit to block sunlight and cool the

Earth back to pre 'tipping point' heat levels!

[M155Y_A1CH]

69. 2nd that motion

It obviously wouldn't work but I still think we should give it a try.

[LynnTheDem]

65. Rightwingnuts continue to display their total ignorance to the entire world.

And this is news how?

[thesquanderer]

67. Also: Amount of Snow is NOT dependent on temperature.

Common sense: If it is snowing in two towns, and one town is 30 degrees and the other is 20 degrees, which town will get more snow? There's no way to tell from that information, there is no correlation there. Even if someone doesn't get that increased moisture in the air from warming will tend to make all accumulations greater (rain or snow), they should at least be able to understand that it can be 20 degrees out with an inch of snow, or 30 degrees out with a foot of snow, so clearly, more snow doesn't mean colder temperatures, as they know just from their own life experience, if they think just a little.

[Odin2005]

71. Morons.

[Dorian Gray]

72. I'm not a conservative

but I've been using it to mock the media's conflation of the snow as some super huge disaster. I think the media used stormageddon in reference to delaware. For me, it has nothing to do with mocking global warming.

[WeekendWarrior]

73. I am SOOOOOOO sick

of stupid politicians who exploit people's ignorance to further their agendas. Sometimes this country just makes me sick.

[HughBeaumont]

74. You know why they flap their gums about weather OR "Global Warming" at all?

Because Al Gore . . . someone who the knuckledraggers consider a liar and an enemy to their diety King George II . . . is the one who brought it to light. If it were someone they liked talking about Global Warming, such as Bernard Goldberg or Hal Lindsey for example, they'd probably either agree or be quiet about it.

Otherwise, their thumbs would be up their asses about the subject and they'd find something else to be unknowledged about and mad at "liberals" for. Oh, and also be willing to share their ignorant opinion to anyone within earshot.

[Roland99]

75. Dumb Fucks! They IGNORE that the Winter Olympics in Vancouver doesn't have enough snow

that they have to truck snow in!

[brendan120678]

81. I think it was kind of a bad idea in the first place...

to have the Winter Olympics there.

I realize that the mountains where the skiing events are to be held are actually miles away from the city center, but Vancouver itself isn't usually an impressively snowy winter city. Yes, they get some snow, but not as much as a city more inland would.

[Art_from_Ark]

94. Exactly

Vancouver isn't your typical Canadian city-- it's actually in a temperate rainforest zone and has relatively mild winters. Vancouver's fine for indoor winter events, but the mountains in North Van/West Van cannot always be counted on to have snow throughout the winter.

[DCBob]

76. Meanwhile a record heat wave roasts Rio...

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.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100210/wl_afp/brazilweatherheatwave_20100210212011

[Roland99]

85. They're all leaving the heat and going to DisneyWorld

Worst time of year to be here...Brazilian tour groups everywhere down there...and they are typically very ill-mannered and disrespectful of others.

[Uncle Joe]

88. This should be it's own thread as a juxtaposition of our winter weather extremes.

Weather is not the same as climate, but when extreme records are continually broken, somebody needs to wake the American People up; as to the truth and apparently too many self-serving, narrow minded, no vision, head in the sand political "leaders" and their corporate media propaganda apparatus aren't going to do it.

[Art_from_Ark]

95. I wonder how much of that Brazilian heat wave

can be traced to Amazon rainforest destruction?

[hatrack]

77. Jeff Masters Blog - Storm Now 969 Mb - Same As Cat 1 Hurricane - Entirely Consistent W. Warming

The second ferocious blizzard in a week to pound the Mid-Atlantic continues to intensify, but has now moved out to sea away from the coast. That's a very good thing, because with a central pressure of 969 mb, the storm is as intense as a Category 1 hurricane. The blizzard brought wind gusts as high as 51 mph at Massachusetts' Nantucket Island last night. The snow has pretty much ended over the Northeastern U.S., but the mighty blizzard dumped 1 - 2 feet of snow over much of the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast, with a peak snowfall of 27.5" recorded at Ortanna, Pennsylvania. When combined with the 1 - 2 feet of snow still on the ground from last weekend's blizzard, the snow depths in the Mid-Atlantic are reaching ridiculous proportions. This morning, Baltimore reported 35" of snow on the ground, which would break their previous all-time record of 30" on snow on the ground, set on February 13, 1899.

EDIT

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/article.html?entrynum=1429

Heavy snow events--a contradiction to global warming theory?
As I discussed in my previous post, record-breaking snowstorms are not an indication that global warming is not occurring. In fact, we can expect there may be more heavy snowstorms in regions where it is cold enough to snow, due to the extra moisture global warming has added to the atmosphere--an extra 4% since 1970. Snow is not the same as cold, and we have to look at global temperatures, not snowfall, to evaluate whether global warming is occurring. Heavy snow can act to bring down global temperatures, as occurred in December 2009, when the Northern Hemisphere experienced its second greatest snow extent on record (only 1985 saw greater December snow cover since reliable snow records began in 1967). Global average land temperatures, as a result, were just 31st warmest on record, even though global ocean temperatures were the 2nd warmest on record. It will be interesting to see what global temperatures did in January, when the statistics are released next week. The global temperature of the lower atmosphere as measured by satellites was the warmest on record in January, and by a considerable margin. I'll discuss this finding in more detail once the blizzard is over. It's also of interest to note that December temperatures in the U.S. were the 18th coldest in the historical record, but January temperatures were 0.3°F above average, according to the National Climatic Data Center. As a whole, it's been a colder than average winter in the U.S., but not greatly so. However, December snow cover was the greatest on record in the contiguous U.S., and January's ranked sixth. Snow cover records go back 44 years, to 1967.

EDIT

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1428

[last_texas_dem]

82. Why do so many conservatives seem like their brains stopped developing

when they were in Elementary school?

[zonkers]

83. Denial. Fear.

[Norrin Radd]

84. And it got up to 103 degrees Fahrenheit in Seattle, Washington, last summer.

[Blue_Tires]

87. i'm sad to see their comments taken seriously as legit news...

[Uncle Joe]

89. I didn't know DeMint worshiped Al Gore, apparently he believes Al is God and if Gore utters a word

it will stop snowing, wonders never cease.:wow:

[nod factor]

97. I cringed

when Al Gore suggested Katrina was the result of global warming.
I thought what happens when we have a quiet summer, of which we've had a few since then?
The truthfulness of the science has been muddled and that's the real issue.
Now those who are skeptical or purposely skeptical are having a field day.
The real science became sensationalized once profit got involved.
It is especially damaging that cap and trade was Enron's brainchild.
And it probably went something like this:
"How can we make money off of the scientific inevitability of a changing climate the world has never seen before?"

[Uncle Joe]

98. Al Gore never suggested Katrina was the result of global warming, but if you can find the quote,

post it, if you can't at least this will give you relief from cringing.

[nod factor]

106. But why ask me for a quote

when I clearly said it was a suggestion - a pretty clear one at that.
I'm sure you've heard the speech where he mentions Katrina and the failures of the federal government with regard to the levees.
Which is fine, but then he goes on to make the claim that unless we do something about global warming hurricanes will be stronger and more frequent. So yes I cringe. The same problem you and I have with republicans inferring causality due to colder weather we should have with Gore and any other prominent climatologist who makes a similar claim because of a hurricane season or two.

[FailureToCommunicate]

107. Let's see, Al Gore and legit climate scientists assert this and you know they're wrong because...?

Putting our heads in the sand about this (like warming oceans causing more severe storms and climate disruption) is like arguing with the bus driver about missing the turn while we head towards the cliff.

[nod factor]

108. Causality works both ways.

That is all I am saying.
The assertion was made that Katrina and "stronger and more frequent hurricanes" are a direct result of global warming.
This is what opens us up to ridicule and Republicans are rightfully jumping at the chance.
The most popular phrase I see in relation to this debate is always climate and weather or two different beasts.
Stick to it then.

[Uncle Joe]

109. This is in response to the this post and 108. The only person combining weather and climate is you.

The failure of the federal government during Katrina wasn't about global warming it was about abandoning the city while treating the victims as criminals.

When Gore and prominent climatologists speak of hurricanes in general that's climate but your posts keep alluding to Katrina and that's a specific weather event, which Gore never said global warming caused, however your posts are smearing him by inference.

If you disagree with Gore and most of the leading world's scientists about the probable consequences from unchecked global warming climate change, have at it, but don't put words in Gore's mouth.

[Abq_Sarah]

114. They're now supposed

To decline in frequency and increase in strength.

[depakid]

100. Small wonder that only 8% of scientists identify themselves as Republicans

[dipsydoodle]

101. That's because

they're too fucking stupid to understand the difference between climate and weather.

[Jimbo S]

102. "Unscientic America"

Just read the book.

Where Carl Sagan when you need him? He'd smack down those idiots?

The science community needs someone charasmatic to counter these folks.

[lib_n_proud7650]

103. Another reason i hate cons

[LogicDiagram]

113. Weather Channel Founder

Recently watched a program narrated by founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman.
While he doesn't dispute global warming, he reviews much of the data collection used to support it.
I feel the same way. There is global warming, but believe data gathered to support it has been skewed due to faulty measuring methods. Therefore, it opens up the entire science to criticism.

As an example, consider the poor grad student who files a thesis with data not properly measured. His thesis will be shot to pieces by his professors and, certainly, open to dispute.
In my background as an engineer, if the data used to arrive at a conclusion has weakness, you should expect criticism.
To see the program, Google "KUSI global warming the other side". It is shown in 5 video segments.

To those of you who may reply negatively: remember, I am not saying it doesn't exist. I am saying the data indicating the magnitude of global warming should be reviewed so those who will dismiss it can be shown otherwise. Calling someone the F-word is not an intelligent way to answer criticism.

[Lithos]

117. Just another SNOW JOB by the pukes

Nothing more...

[LogicDiagram]

118. Founder of Weather Channel giving us a snow job? But why?

Why would a venerable meteorologist snow us?
As an independant-thinking democrat and a scientist, I have to give weight to the words of a man with a background in meteorology over politicians who simply do not have those credentials. Perhaps the people snowing us are the politicians who are selling snake oil to enrich themselves.

Remember, don't be a ditto-head like the Rush's Audience. QUESTION AUTHORITY !!!!! Especially if they have self interest in what they are selling.

[Dark]

119. "Honk if you global warming." This is a FUCKING SENATOR?!

Jesus, spellcheck you fucking republicans!