For many, warm December day confirms global warming; Others say, ‘More, please’

Unseasonably warm temperatures across the eastern half of the nation today saw many record highs toppled (though not by much).

https://instagr.am/p/Sy54wPMheC/media/?size=l

In a pre-“Inconvenient Truth” age, such a day might have been good for a few years’ worth of “remember that time?” anecdotes, but now, a couple of warm days in December brings only two words to mind: global warming.

Twitchy readers in the South and Southwest might not appreciate the following tweets, but for the rest of the country, a day or two of “global” warming in December is a welcome development.

Oh yeah, that guy. So far today, Gore has not tweeted emergency instructions for how to deal with this change in climate, so we can only imagine what he’s up to.

  • http://pinterest.com/j0s1395/ Josephine (D)

    Mom and I have our AC on. And we live about 20 miles south of the Michigan-Ohio border.

  • Danny Wheeler

    Well, it’s not the Winter Solstice yet, so (pardon the pun) chill out!

  • Gallatin

    So when we get 8 inches of snow 2 weeks from now will that be global warming?

    • Teresa Davis McCormick

      That is exactly what i was thinking. I remember a couple years back we had a really big snow storm here (OH) and some ass was on the tv telling everybody it was because of global warming. It’s just a scam.

      • Gallatin

        Amen, these global warming (I refuse to use their current terminology climate change) simply disgust me.

    • o0Nighthawk0o

      No, you forget that it isn’t global warming anymore. They changed it to climate change a while back when people were having the worst winters on record.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002109532283 Jillane Kent

        Touche. It is now “global climate disruption”.

    • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

      I was just remembering winter of 09 (I wrote that like an old timer saying “aught nine”) here in Virginia. We had a brief cold spell before Thanksgiving, like this year, and it got fairly warm until Dec 18. It snowed that day and was bitterly cold such that we didn’t see the ground again until late March.

    • Penmar

      Well, of course it is, lib logic, anything that promotes more taxes is an affirmative, such as the ‘carbon tax’.

    • http://www.facebook.com/brett.mcmicken Brett McMicken

      if you have ever read 1984, you’ll remember that, during hate week, the speaker changes the name of the enemy in mid-sentence without a pause and the masses went along with it. same concept with the global-warming crowd. if a breeze is strong enough to blow over their lattes then it’s a sign of global warming.

      • Gallatin

        Have read and have a first edition copy. Animal Farm was the first book my Dad gave me to read, from their it was anything I could get my hands on that was as thought provoking.

    • SpinMeNot

      They’ll call that “Climate Chaos” …

  • GaryTheBrave

    Bet ya it’s probably close to 70 in Sydney and Christ Church about now as well. Anecdotal “evidence” of warm days in a particular place is not “proof” of Global Warming. The word Global indicates that it would have to be getting warmer ALL OVER THE WORLD!! Though it was a nice day here in CO it certainly wasn’t warm. Besides, Winter doesn’t begin until December 21st.

    • tredglx

      Let’s hope so – it’s summer there!

  • Pkruta

    I thought it was changed to climate change cuz it was getting cool in summer months. Since it’s warm again, I guess it’s back to global warming?

    • AndiGibson

      Yes, that’s how it works – when it’s unseasonably warm – it’s globul warming.

      When it’s unseasonably cold – it’s globul cooling … climate change

      And when it stormy outside – it’s Climate disruption

      • JustLikeAnimals

        Like in 2009 when the US Congress had to cancel debates on global warming because of the ice storm that paralyzed Washington, D.C.???????

        • AndiGibson

          Yup :-)

    • J.Milliscone

      It’s called Climate Change because it’s easier for people to understand as a oppose to Global Warming. Yes the global temperature is rising faster than before as a direct result of CO2 gas being released, deforestation, etc….

      • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

        It’s called “climate change” because global warming has a well-deserved negative connotation.

        The climate does change and the left is trying to lump human involvement in with naturally occurring processes.

        We aren’t that influential, and there are feedback loops that are not well understood, which isn’t surprising since a lot of people acting like they know about climate change aren’t even real scientists.

        • J.Milliscone

          So there are several different points.
          1)The amount of C02 in the atmosphere has never been this high. We know this from ice core samples.
          2)We know that destroying plant life also increases the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
          3)For another perfect example of humans have a severe impact on the planet was the hole in the Ozone layer.

          There is no argument that the earth’s climate isn’t cyclical. Its the rate at which it is increasing that is made made. I dunno perhaps you’ve never really listened to someone who knew what they were talking about so you are unaware of the science.

          But please look at the overwhelming peer reviewed studies that show the rate isn’t natural.

          • Terry

            There is no “global” warming. That was published in UK about 3 weeks ago. Globally, temps have stayed average for 16 years in a row. You can’t call it “Global” warming when its a little warmer than normal in a few cities in the US. As for that ozone hole, how do you know it didn’t exist 1000 years ago (or even 100 years ago)? Note that ‘high’ temps 1 degree warmer break records from 1950. But wait… there was no global warming in 1950. Are you old enough to remember the 1970’s when all the buzz was that we are going into the next Ice Age? Here’s another news flash, the “north pole” is moving by about 40 miles per year, and has for at least a decade. What if WI becomes FL in 1,000 years because the magnet poles are shifting? Have you ever wondered why Greenland is covered with Ice, and Iceland is green and lush? Are you familiar with the Glaciers that at one time (before cars) extended all the way down to the Madison WI area? And I’m really curious how much I must drive my truck in order to replicate the amount of crap that spews from an erupting volcano. There are at least 15 eruptions per year, globally. Ah, that nasty C02. Well, abortion is helping there, with some 1.5mil+ abortions every year, in the US alone. That’s a lot less souls spewing the evil CO2 by breathing.

          • J.Milliscone

            Actually most everything you said is wholly in accurate.

            I’m getting over a cold so I know I will be a little curt if I continue.

            CFC are not naturally occurring which is why we know it didn’t happen 100 years ago.

          • Terry

            Actually, its wholly Accurate. Here’s a link to recent story in UK on 16 years in a row of NO “global” warming. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released–chart-prove-it.html CFC are not naturally occurring which is why we know what didn’t happen 100 years ago? The glacial melt? I have to drive about 10 minutes and take some photos to post of the scars the glaciers left in the land (its actually quite beautiful) The Poles DO shift, and are currently moving. see: http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-poleReversal.html Do you dispute that humans exhale C02 with every breath they take, or that the US aborted about 1.5 million souls last year? I need to know in order to provide you with a links so you can read it for yourself. I, seriously, hope you are feeling better. Not trying to get into an argument, just giving support for the facts I previously posted.

          • J.Milliscone

            What do abortions have to do with anything?

            And a quick read states “Disagreement: Professor Phil Jones, left, from the University of East Anglia, dismissed the significance of the plateau. Professor Judith Curry, right, from Georgia Tech university in America, disagreed, saying the computer models used to predict future warming were ‘deeply flawed’”

          • Terry

            Phil Jones believes in global warming, Judith Curry doesn’t. Abortions… People exhale CO2 with every breath they take. 1.5 mil abortions in 1 year means that many less people to breath and alter the climate… the statement is ludicrous on its face. I’m sure the earth goes thru natural warming and cooling cycles and don’t dispute that. I take offense at the notion that human beings have anything to do with it. There are a bunch of links to the man-made global warming hoax in this article on events that just occurred at a UN meeting today. http://www.climatedepot.com/a/18726/Fmr-Thatcher-advisor-Lord-Monckton-evicted-from-UN-climate-summit-after-challenging-global-warming–Escorted-from-the-hall-and-security-officers-stripped-him-of-his-UN-credentials.

          • Gallatin

            2)We know that destroying plant life also increases the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

            Damn cows, sounds like I better eat more steak so they stop eating those plants.

          • mdtljt

            Anyone remember not so long ago when cow poots were to blame for global warming??? Gallatin, you bring the steaks & I’ll fire up the grill…a CHARCOAL grill, natch….Please, can ANYONE make Greenhouse Gore stay in his mansion and STFU???

          • Gallatin

            I’m all for a massive cookout that will piss the global warming and PETA people off at the same time.

          • mdtljt

            God Bless Ya, Sweetie….Don’t know where you are in the good ol’ US of A, but if you’re ever in the Cape Fear region, let me know…we’ll cook anything you want over an open fire or on a charcoal grill and it’ll taste better than anything you’ve ever put in your mouth….and yes, even that….Merry Christmas!!!!

          • o0Nighthawk0o

            1. Please explain to us how, when CO2 levels were lower in the past, that the Earth’s average temps were higher than they are now.
            2. Considering that plants remove CO2 it only stands to reason that less plants mean more CO2. However, more CO2 means that plants have more to ‘breath’ and thus flourish meaning more plants. It balances itself out.
            3. The Ozone hole wasn’t discovered until we developed instruments capable of observing it. It has always been there as far as we know and is quite probably natural.

          • JustLikeAnimals

            Your #3 is a very important point. Humans have at best about 600 years of data related to weather systems on this planet. The planet, on the other hand, is about 4.6 byo and has dynamic systems and cycles that range in the 10’s and 100’s of millions of years. Anyone who stands up and professes to understand the dynamic processes of this planet is a fool or a liar or both.

            Ask your global warming friends what effect they think axial tilt and wobble has had historically on climate and watch them fumble. It’s fun.

          • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

            One reason ice samples wold not have a high CO2 content is that photosynthesis doesn’t occur at the same rate in those cold areas where it does with lots of plant life, like in warm areas.
            Your belief that science is pure and noble is kind of naive. There has been too much evidence that the people connecting any climate change to human activity are doing so for personal gain.

            One way to make sure we DON’T FIND solutions for any real harm is by destroying the economy with bogus “green” solutions that are forced into place at the expense of a reliable energy grid. When people can’t pay for electricity there are going to be a lot of trees go missing and a huge cloud of carbon smoke across the globe.

          • SpinMeNot

            Wrong, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has been much higher in the pre-historic past — last time they were this high, where there is supporting evidence was 15 million years ago.

            Jesus, Mary and Joseph, will you get your facts straight — oh sorry, facts are irrelevant to liberal-progressive pukes that take junk science as fact.

          • J.Milliscone

            Cite the study

          • SpinMeNot

            I could ask the same of you; however as I am actually knowledgeable in this subject … I’ll give you one the sites that is on your side of the argument.

            http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/virtualmuseum/climatechange2/07_1.shtml

            Even with the range of error / std dev you are still wrong.

          • J.Milliscone

            Thank you for the information. It will take me sometime to go over it. If the data supports your point, I’m ok with that. One of the great things about the scientific method is, when you get new information, you can change your stance.

            Again thank you.

          • SpinMeNot

            You are welcome, I can provide others if the one above is convincing. And I would like to acknowledge that I am impressed by your response.

            *hat-tip*

          • J.Milliscone

            I try to go to sites where the majority of people disagree with me.

            When it’s gun control, death penalty and a couple other issues I go to left leaning sites. Most other things I go to right ones. Not just to argue, but from time to time I do find genuine people, like yourself, who have real and valid data.

            If I’m not wrong sometimes, than I’m not learning. If I’m not learning than I’m not growing.

          • SpinMeNot

            I’m with you … When I’m working on something new, and the math or the results show me I am wrong, I am more often than not more excited than if the math/experimental results showed that I was correct.

            Learning is what it is all all about. I am thrilled to have made your acquaintance.

            Edit: Oh, and it seems I owe you an apology. You are a free-thinker, I judged you far too quickly.

      • Gallatin

        Really, prove it, and you can’t use that stupid hockey stick graph either.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002109532283 Jillane Kent

        The fact that temperatures stabilized 16 years ago, not withstanding? Tell me, what was the culprit behind the warming prior to our last ice age?

      • Penmar

        It is not, they had warm temps such as this back before the industrial age. Temperature fluctuations are cyclical, here see a chart of temps from 2500 BC to present.

        http://www.longrangeweather.com/images/GTEMPS.gif

    • Penmar

      Actually, I believe it was changed because they couldn’t get enough backing for global warming, no one was buying it.

  • peteee363

    gotta love global warming, but! there is proof it was much warmer in the 1300’s, but the alarmists such as algore never mention that warm spell. those crazy rennisance people driving those oldsmobiles, and chrysler imperials before we had roads. surely it was man made back then too, and don’t call me shirley! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A5t5_O8hdA r.i.p. leslie!

  • davjohn

    Has anyone else noticed how much weight Al Gore has gained? He could pass for the Dough Boy.

    • http://www.facebook.com/brett.mcmicken Brett McMicken

      when al walks into a room there’s more gore in it than in an entire season of the walking dead

    • JustLikeAnimals

      There should be a ban on food because Al Gore is committing suicide by cheeseburger.

      • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

        ShhhSSSSSSHHHHH!!! Don’t give them any ideas!!

    • Gallatin

      Yeah it must be tough having your net worth go from 2 million to 100 million in 10 years simply by scamming the people. He’s got to do something with that money so I’m sure steaks are on the menu a lot. What a hypocrite.

      • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

        Well, you can only build so many energy inefficient mansions.

      • mdtljt

        What was the name of the Monty Python skit with the fat man in the restaurant?? Oh, come on Sir, it’s just a little after dinner mint….BOOM

    • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

      dj, Algore has gotten so big he could “pass” the Dough Boy without straining.

    • mdtljt

      Please don’t insult the Dough Boy….I was thinking he’s morphing into Michael Moore…yay, just what we need…NOT

  • NRPax

    Someone let me know when the climate alarmists come out with a chart telling us what the ideal worldwide temperature is supposed to be at all times. I can wait.

    • J.Milliscone

      Oh you don’t believe in weather predictions?

      • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

        Then why is it called “climate change” and not “weather change”?

        • J.Milliscone

          because the climate makes the weather.

          • NRPax

            The quick answer is something I said elsewhere.

            In the 70s, we were all going to die because glaciers would overwhelm us and we would be buried in an ice age. DIdn’t happen.

            In the 80s, we were all going to die because overpopulation was going to pack us in everywhere. Didn’t happen

            In the 90s, we were all going to die because the oceans were going to be fished clean and we’d starve. Didn’t happen.

            Come 2000, we were all going to die because of global warming and we were going to burn up. Didn’t happen.

            Ten years later, we’re all going to die because of climate change. So far, the environmental movement doesn’t have a good batting average. And honestly, no matter what the weather had been it would have been blamed on climate change. When your hypothesis is reinforced no matter what data you get, that’s not really good science.

            And to answer your question, I believe in weather predictions but I’ve seen them get proven wrong too. Now what about my original question: What do you think the worldwide temperature is supposed to be?

          • JustLikeAnimals

            I recall a presser once where some bubble-headed news reporter asked the NASA Administrator what NASA was doing about climate change. The Admin asked what she meant and she replied something to the effect that, with all their technology, couldn’t NASA stop climate change and stabilize the climate? He responded to her by asking her this simple question: “Which climate do you want, and who says that’s ideal?”

            For those who don’t understand the ever-changing dynamics of this planet, go ask the polar bears what’s ideal, then the sea turtles and octopus, a few camels, desert bugs and beetles, and finally a sampling of amazon jungle inhabitants. Then get back to us.

            Earth is an ever-changing habitat. It was that way before humans showed up and it will continue changing long after humans are gone.

            To those who feel threatened and afraid of the uncertainty of its future:

            Please feel free to leave.

          • TexSizzle

            “When your hypothesis is reinforced no matter what data you get, that’s not really good science.” Actually, it’s not science at all; it’s religion pretending to be science.

          • SpinMeNot

            No actually, weather makes the climate. Weather is the “instantaneous” effect, climate is a pattern developed by studying weather and its effect over time.

            The sun heats the land and the water — land temperature changes rapidly in comparison to water temperature. The land and water heat the atmosphere. The rotation of the planet, the impact of solar radiation, the currents in the oceans, and the temperature differences between lands and waters creates weather. Weather when studied over a long period of time define a climate. Given the complexity of all the above, predicting the weather is still a crap shoot. Therefore climate predictions are equally questionable.

            Weather changes on a dime, the climate doesn’t.

            And another useful idiot slithers out of the pond to annoy the free-thinkers.

      • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

        Have you watched the 7 Day Forecast on a regular basis?

      • mdtljt

        Obviously you’ve never lived in the DC Metro area….light rain becomes gully-washers, a dusting of snow becomes 18-24 inches of snow with an ice crust 2 inches thick…I dream of having a job that I could screw up as badly as those “meterologists” in DC and keep getting raises…

  • http://twitter.com/ObamaLies2Much Obama Lies

    No matter what the climate does, to these idiots, it’s proof of “climate change” and it means we need to destroy all power plants and automobiles to save the planet (since these things obviously never happened before).
    And they call US the science deniers.

    • J.Milliscone

      No one says that but I’m sure it helps keep you in perpetual, blissful ignorance.

      • o0Nighthawk0o

        Apparently you missed all the investments by the gov in ‘green’ energy, windmills, solar and other failed techs. Maybe you remember the Volt that the gov is pushing to take over conventional autos. Or Mr. Prez’s promise to tax coal plants out of existance.

      • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil

        Many people say that. All of those are on the left side of the political spectrum and most say it to benefit themselves financially.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002109532283 Jillane Kent

        If you’ve never seen such sentiment on display, I contend that you don’t often red the news of the day.

      • SpinMeNot

        Really, what about the 200+ coal fired plants that are going to be shutdown in the US next year? We are being told it is because of global warming, but those that think for themselves know its about raising the cost of energy, creating power shortages.

  • aPLWBinAK

    We had weather today….a sure sign that something mysterious and ominous is afoot ///

  • Lady 12

    Maybe the new tropics in Antarctica will make up for the disappearing rain forests in South America. If the weather in Wisconsin today is an indication of things to come, then I love global warming!

  • tredglx

    From the looks of Algore these days, looks like he should have stopped saying “more please” a long time ago.
    As for me, I’ll take 60s in December every year, all month long.

  • Lord Foggybottom

    Al Gore is a dick.

  • gr82cu2

    The climate is definitely changing people. 70 here today, 45 tomorrow. Welcome to the midwest. Been this way all my life. Have to say though that sweating my arse off today as I was putting up the Christmas tree was a little strange, LOL.

    • SpinMeNot

      Sure, climate changes, many times … it was much warmer when we had one contiguous land mass (Pangea) surrounded by ocean/sea.

      Little Ice Age anyone? Climate change is normal, but you know the libs, never let a crisis, real or imaginary, go to waste.

  • Mike Horve

    Wait till next week when it gets 10 degrees below normal and they change back to climate change. Why do people with a brain listen to them.

  • JustLikeAnimals

    “Global warming” is a libertard myth created for the sole purpose of keeping Al Gore in $25k speeches and somehow relevant.

    On the other hand, the process of climate change is a natural process that has occurred in elongated fashion on this planet for the better part of the last 3.6 billion years when the first atmospheric conditions formed.

    • J.Milliscone

      It’s good that your close to understanding, but not quite.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002109532283 Jillane Kent

        “Your”?

      • JustLikeAnimals

        Denying that the climatological and atmospheric conditions on this planet have been in a constant state of flux since about +1.0by after accretion shows how uninformed and ill-educated you are. The ice core samples are repleat with alternating instances of warming and cooling spanning 10’s and 100’s of thousands of years, with gradients far in excess of anything that’s been historically recorded and well beyond any of the anomalies being observed today. This planet has a self-regulating system for heat management and it didn’t begin when humans began burning fossil fuels.

        Your takeaway: The planet has been changing since it formed, and it will continue long after humans (yes, including you!) are gone.

        So do youself (and all of us!!) a favor: Read a decent text or two, learn to do some math, and try to catch up with the smart people. Otherwise, go sit in the corner, put on your pointed hat, drink you government-issued Kool-aid, and STFU.

        • J.Milliscone

          Yes that is true but the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has NEVER been this high. An anomaly isn’t a trend which we are seeing. So while it’s convenient for short sited people like yourself, it’s not reality.

  • J.Milliscone

    Why are you even posting anything related to science on this site? Not only do very few understand how science works, they think there is a liberal bias in science. If you thank facts have bias than books aren’t for you. Better to stick to the echo chamber.

    I’m so glad that kind of ignorance is proving out Darwinism as it slowly fades away.

    • OHNESA

      You are so much more intelligent then anyone else here (in your mind)….why do you even bother?

  • aegean1

    “Twitchy readers in the South and Southwest might not appreciate the following tweets”

    Nope, I’ve been saying the same thing. Last winter was pretty mild, and I’ve been hoping for a second mild winter. Looks like I might just get it.

    • mdtljt

      Amen to that!!! As I live on the coast of NC, I routinely pray for a warm Christmas…nothing better than walking on the beach barefoot in shorts and a t-shirt on Jesus’ birthday wishing all the other beach-walkers MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

  • http://twitter.com/redsoxunixgeek Smitty 

    Science is for Dumb People! Even though there is proof that global warming exists, we need to show that this is a vast left wing conspiracy. Lets Organize!

    • ERMERGERD

      You’re a lib, you should know by now it’s called “climate change”.

      • http://twitter.com/redsoxunixgeek Smitty 

        I am not a “Lib”. You can’t pigeon hole me that easily.

        • mdtljt

          OK, you’re not a “Lib”….if that’s true, you can easily and succinctly state your case without going into orgasmic skrees of LibSpeak…I truly hope you can…

  • ERMERGERD

    I need a lib to explain this to me. Humans are just here by chance, we mean absolutely nothing to the world, etc. Then how can we cause the Earth which has been around billions of years to suddenly heat up so much? If the timeline of Earth was put into 24 hours, humans would appear at a minute before midnight.

    • J.Milliscone

      Very simple. Humans are not here by chance we are her because we evolved this way. There are several molecules that trap heat int our atmosphere. The amount of fossil fuels we burn coupled with deforestation, has changed THE RATE at which the global climate is getting warmer. That’s a pretty bad counter point to say the least. By that logic bullets have been around for a small amount of time in human existence, so they can’t have an impact on people dying right?

      Perhaps you weren’t around sweetie, but we did make a HUGE hole in the OZONE layer from CFCs and Aerosol. Which is why they are not used anymore. Many areas that have suffered from some sort of nuclear interaction have very lasting effects.

      • ERMERGERD

        The Earth is 4 billion years old, and humans have caused this much destruction? Not the god knows how many asteroids, meteors, etc. that have hit it. Not volcanoes erupting over 4 BILLION years. I don’t “buy” it. But, that’s fine. Keep living in your world of worrying about “global warming”. Drive a green car, live in a hut. Just keep those who don’t agree with you out of it.

        • J.Milliscone

          Not many have hit the earth (primarily because of the larger gas giants and their gravity pulling most into them) and one of the major impacts created the moon and ended the Dinosaurs. We know quite a bit more than you assume. It’s funny you understand the age of the earth and accept that science but don’t accept other parts of facts.

          You don’t need to “buy” it, that’s fine, but your ignorance does effect others in this sense. I just hope one day you mature enough to understand science and look it up yourself.

          So you don’t remember the hole in the ozone do you?

          • ERMERGERD

            Science explains a lot, but does not explain most things. I don’t believe in “global warming”, and never will. I accept that you do, and that’s fine. I won’t insult you; I don’t know you. I’d appreciate it if you’d refrain from insulting me, but that’s your choice. Have a nice life, just leave me, and everyone else alone. We don’t need more regulations.

          • J.Milliscone

            Science explains EVERYTHING. I do apologize for the cheeky retort but you ignorance is painful.

            I still like how you ignore the fact about the ozone layer. You don’t have to believe in gravity either but when something above you falls, it’ll prove gravity however many times need be.

          • ERMERGERD

            It doesn’t. You’re ignorant in my opinion, but it doesn’t matter. Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays to whatever you celebrate. If nothing, have a good life.

          • J.Milliscone

            Perhaps you shouldn’t be surprised that someone is curt with you when you immediately insult them. Your first comment used the word lib which, in this context, is disparaging and insulting.

            I’m sorry you’re not mature enough to understand those kinds of things.

          • ERMERGERD

            Would “liberal” be better? Don’t get offended so easily. I wasn’t offended by your many belittling remarks. I merely asked you to not insult me, since I didn’t insult you. I didn’t know you were insulted by my first post. You don’t know me, we’ll never meet, you shouldn’t put much merit into what I say. If I did, you would have been cussed out by now. :)

          • http://twitter.com/redsoxunixgeek Smitty 

            You are either willfully ignorant, or you really believe what you type. Science can’t be faked. There is more data proving Climate Change and Global Warming than isn’t.

            Math doesn’t lie.

            Trends do not lie.

            Might the changes be trends of up and down swing of the earth adjusting? yes. But to say that people and pollution don’t contribute, I invite you to come to Salt Lake City, where the pollution has changed the average winter and increased temperatures and reduced snow because of the blanket of inversion keeps the surface artificially warm. http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/012710-2.html

            I know you think that Science has a liberal bias. But scientists who ignore religion are “liberals” according to your definition.

            So if Humans are a contributing factor – shouldn’t we take steps and processes to alleviate and reduce the impact? You know, for the long term?

          • Cold War Grunt

            Science can’t be faked … lol, yeah right. Its faked continually.

            Here’s one example: http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=lab-creates-fake-dna-evidence-2009-08-18

            your point is proven false.

          • http://twitter.com/redsoxunixgeek Smitty 

            No my point was proven right had you read that article… it is a process to determine modified DNA vs. Real DNA.

            Nice Try

          • Cold War Grunt

            No, you missed the point — DNA evidence can “manufactured”, therefore science can be faked. But here, let me give you a few more

            http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14886-stemcell-researcher-guilty-of-falsifying-data.html.

            http://explorable.com/scientific-falsification.html, scroll down to the cases section.

            As a scientist (published, peer reviewed papers, contributor to several texts on autonomic computing) I’ve seen it done, and I’ve busted people for it.

            Edit: let me add a few more …

            http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13/scientific-research-fraud-bad-practice

            http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/12/red-wine-researcher-said-to-falsify-data/

            http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14886-stemcell-researcher-guilty-of-falsifying-data.html

            http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/07/epic-fraud-how-to-succeed-in-science-without-doing-any/

            who is denying what now?

            You can deny it all you want, but science can be faked, and often is.

          • TexSizzle

            Correction: Science *attempts to* explain everything. When it runs across some things it cannot explain, such as the beginnings of life and of variety of life, many who call themselves scientists fall back on religion; e.g. the religion of macroevolutionism.

          • J.Milliscone

            No they have already proven how life has created. I’d have to go look for the peer reviewed study, but it’s a couple years old.

          • TexSizzle

            No they haven’t. For them to have proven it, they would have to be able to demonstrate it. Of course, it’s impossible for them to create new life from non-living matter, because they do *not* know how it was done. Again, you are showing your religious faith and calling it science.

          • Cold War Grunt

            No, science doesn’t explain everything — that would mean we know everything already. Science can’t yet explain how certain medications work (unless of course the TV commercials for those medications are lying about it); science can’t explain the sudden spike in children born with autism.

            Who doesn’t believe in the Ozone layer — the question to you was prove the hole wasn’t there before we had instruments that could detect it. Then their is the bit about volcanic eruptions, and seems to me somebody pointed out that water vapor is much more contributory as a GHG than CO2.

          • J.Milliscone

            Science explains everything, but we don’t have a complete understanding of science.

            The increase in autistic children can be attributed to very specific changes in our environment and what we eat, but I don’t have the data to apply the scientific method personally, but I’m willing to be there are studies

          • Juanita Estrada

            J millisecond is ignorant. Don’t waste your time with people like that.

          • o0Nighthawk0o

            Umm, now I know you are clueless. An asteroid collision created the Moon AND killed the dinosaurs??? Really??? Funny that you accuse others of ignorance and you say something like this??

          • Guest

            Just to let everyone know. This was a reply to J.Milliscone who asserted in a post that a large asteroid, or something, collided with the Earth and formed the Moon AND killed off the dinosaurs at the same time. I pointed out the mistake and instead of admitting they were wrong they just deleted the post. Nothing like someone who can’t admit to and learn from a mistake.

          • Cold War Grunt

            There are 200 known impact craters on the surface of the Earth, and how many more we don’t know about, and then there are the ones that have removed by erosion. Smaller objects strike the atmosphere every day. Objects between 5m-10m strike atmosphere yearly, frequency is estimated at 1x year. And it goes up from there.

            Please take your own advice, before being snarky with others. You are still ignoring the questions other people are asking in order to further you agenda. You have zero credibility with regard to your assertions on AGW.

          • J.Milliscone

            While your first assertion is correct (with regards to the impacts the earth has) the straw man tactic isn’t grounded in science.

            EDIT: While there have been some larger impacts to the earth (creation of the moon), the amount when compared to the moon and the larger planets further out and their moons, it is significantly smaller.

            So yes, the moon and the larger planets block our planet as ours, in turn, block the inner planets.

          • Cold War Grunt

            I’m sorry, where exactly is the strawman in my statement? You claim that not many objects hit the earth, that is not the case. If you had stated that not many objects of a size that present a danger to life on Earth, you would have been correct. That is to say, the strawman was yours — subjective statement, with no evidence to support it or details to be discussed.

            I said absolutely nothing about your assertion that the larger planets and the moon block some of the incoming objects.

      • TexSizzle

        The eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines a few years back put more CFCs into the atmosphere in a few days, and with sufficient force to send them up into the ozone layer, than were ever created by humans. Why didn’t that destroy the ozone layer, if CFCs are so dangerous?

        • J.Milliscone

          The hole in the Ozone is decades old and if you want to fight that out than I suggest you read some books on the subject. Unless you think science is biased.

          • TexSizzle

            Either you are missing the point, or you are intentionally ignoring it. My guess is the latter. According to your belief that CFCs harm the ozone, a few volcanic eruptions should have destroyed it entirely, considering what you seem to think man-made CFCs have done to it. Or are you saying that man-made CFCs are more harmful than natural CFCs with the same chemical structure?

            Science isn’t biased, only some so-called scientists.

  • http://www.vatican.va/ Rulz

    As an environmental scientist, I’m a part of the MORE PLEASE crowd, especially with Obama energy price hikes on the way.

    He can’t charge us for using the sun!

    ….at least not yet.

    • J.Milliscone

      No GOP memeber would support solar

      • NRPax

        Given that solar can’t generate enough electricity, has a limited area where it can be used effectively and the process to make it does a lot of environmental damage, I can’t blame them for not getting on board the solar bandwagon too much.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002109532283 Jillane Kent

        There is a difference between supporting solar and supporting solar companies that cannot manage to run a successful company, despite gross federal subsidization. I suggest that you peruse the Congressional record before pontificating next time. Your belief that Republicans have brought forth, nor supported legislation in the name of anthropogenic climate change is false.

        • mdtljt

          So true, Jilliane, but I fear your proper spelling and use of appropriate words and grammar will thoroughly befuddle JM….Bless his – or her – heart…

        • J.Milliscone

          When you compare the raw numbers of subsides with energy, you would know that your assertion is false.

      • mdtljt

        …hide and watch…if it puts money in their bottomless pocket, they damn sure will!!!!

        • J.Milliscone

          i know right… damn GOP

  • Jack Deth

    Jeebus!

    I’ve ridden bicycles and have even broken out the outdoor grille on previous Christmas Days in Maryland. When the temperatures wavered for a day or five in the high 60s.

    Of course, winter doesn’t make its grand entrance here until January and hangs around through February,

    These Global Warming Rejects must really be reaching!

    • NRPax

      Oh lordie, Jack. You’re in the People’s Republic of MD as well? My sympathies.

      • Jack Deth

        How are things down at Pax River?

        I’m in P.G. County. Which Howard Stern often referred to as “The land of the living dead”.

        • NRPax

          heh. Actually, my name is a pun. NR Pax = Inner Peace. I’m out in Montgomery County and now have to pay the fee for mentioning its name.

  • o0Nighthawk0o

    Someone really needs to explain to these morons the difference between weather and climate. While the fool goes on about tying a record in Indy he misses the fact that just a few miles north in Ft. Wayne the temp, while warm, missed the record by 5 degrees. They must have missed, or ignored, the report that showed that the warming trend stopped 16 years ago. Just looking at historical data the warmest Christmas day in Indy was 64 in 1893. Damn those people ‘driving’ their big, planet killing SUH’s. (Sport Utility Horses)

  • Seewetoldu

    I don’t even hearing his name Al Gore…go away…shut up. Your a fool. Everybody is laughing at you. And if there not, your paying them not to.

  • my preciousss!!

    blame cory booker!!!!!
    earth’s CO2 is going to have a really HIGH reading sometime this month. cory booker bought LOTS of beans so he can live off on welfare for a week. ha!

  • Cold War Grunt

    I highly recommend the following site — Burt Rutan on climate change. For those that don’t know, Burt Rutan is one of the original eco-conservationist types.

    http://rps3.com/Pages/Burt_Rutan_on_Climate_Change.htm