Thursday, January 15, 2009

Global warming is real!

Global warming is real, it is manmade, and it is a huge problem. And if the corporations producing greenhouse gases lack the incentive to produce honest research on the impact of those gases, then it's up to the government to do so. I have read numerous treatments from both the 'advocates' and the deniers and it is clear that the latter are guilty of gross manipulation and distortion of the evidence.

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/01/you-can-always-count-on-sin.html#3818188830148131193

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — The cold wave that stunned the nation's midsection expanded into the Northeast on Wednesday with subzero temperatures and biting wind that kept even some winter sports fans at home.

The wind chill hit 33 below zero during the night at Massena, N.Y., and the National Weather Service predicted actual temperatures nearly that low in parts of the region by Thursday night. The weather service said Flint, Mich., set a record low early Wednesday at 19 degrees below zero.

Vermont's Bolton Valley ski resort, where it was 10 below Wednesday morning, canceled night skiing through Friday night for fear that skiers could freeze if they were marooned on a malfunctioning ski lift.

A couple of ski areas in northern Minnesota closed for the day because of temperatures that reached 38 below zero at International Falls, with the wind chill during the night estimated at 50 below.

Maine residents braced for nighttime readings down to 40 below zero. And in the Midwest, Iowans were warned that temperatures could drop as far as 27 below zero during the night, matching a Jan. 15 record set in 1972.

Temperatures on Thursday were expected to range from 10 below zero in the far north to the low teens in southern coastal areas. Farther south, morning temperatures were in the 20s from Texas to Georgia, and along the Gulf Coast the weather service reported a low of just 28 at Mobile, Ala.

Even northern Georgia and Kentucky could see single-digit lows by Friday, with zero possible at Lexington, Ky., the weather service warned. Kentucky hasn't been that cold since December 2004.

Farmworkers in Florida, where the service forecast Thursday night lows in the teens to lower 20s, plucked ripened berries early as a precaution. Strawberry growers near Tampa and blueberry growers around Gainesville checked irrigation pumps, ready to spray fruit with water to create a protective ice coating if needed.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ifTg_yfYpAykFLdY6fVBnb3NeMZAD95NBN701

In northern Minnesota, temperatures dropped to 40 degrees Fahrenheit below zero, and record lows near that were recorded in North Dakota as single-digit and sub-zero temperatures spread through a broad swath of the country's northern and central tiers.

Subzero temperatures were forecast through Friday morning. North-central Kansas and south-central Nebraska, key hard red winter wheat-producing areas, were forecast to see lows ranging for zero to -10 degrees F,
"This is the coldest weather we've seen in a few years," said DTM Meteorlogix forecaster Mike Palmerino.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1447506520090114?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

First, we were buffeted by record-setting, hurricane-force winds. Then we were blasted by record-setting snowfall in a couple of blizzard-like snowstorms.

It will be cold, but not as cold as it was in parts of the Great Plains and upper Midwest, where temperatures hit lows of minus-40 degrees. As another Arctic front moves into the area, temperatures Thursday will be bone-chilling, with a high near 5 degrees in the afternoon and winds that could gust to 28 mph.

This region hasn't had a day where the high temperature didn't break 5 degrees since January 1994, meteorologist Jon Hitchcock said. The low Thursday night will drop to minus-5 degrees at the airport, and it will likely be much colder farther inland.

http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/548553.html

Record Breaking Cold Expected
 
Bitter, brutal, piercing cold.  Near record temperatures with biting winds will bring a taste of the Artcic right into Chicago.  The worst of the cold is expected tomorrow evening but there will be a stretch of more than 24 hours of Sub Zero temperatures.  A windchill warning is in effect for the entire region until Noon on Friday.  Exposure to the cold should be limited.

The last nine days have already put Chicago in the record books.  An historic stretch of snow -  Nine consecutive days of measurable snow - breaks the previous record of 8 consecutive days set back in 1973.  The snow will let up for this cold blast but another storm brings snow to parts of the area late on Friday into Saturday.

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=8252200&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

Raw, subzero surface temperatures and winds driving wind chill readings to the minus-40 range settled in along a path from the Canadian border to the lower Midwest, with some cities posting record overnight lows. Records were recorded in the Michigan cities of Flint, at 19 below zero, and Saginaw, 10 below, and in parts of the Lower Mississippi Valley, where Hot Springs and Monticello, Arkansas, saw temps dip into the low 20s, a rarity, said National Weather Service meteorologist Andrew Orrison.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/01/15/Arctic_blast_b-r-r-r-rings_c-c-c-old/UPI-31241232025181/

20 comments:

  1. come on join with us to FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING..

    i've a lot of article about GLOBAL WARMING..

    http://hernadi-key.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  2. Imagine how cold it would have been without SUVs for that past decade.

    On the plus side, Colorado Springs is currently sitting at a toasty 36 degrees.

    I blame Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It probably all balances out; it's probably extra warm in the southern hemisphere or something.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Polar Bears are freeezing to death.
    We had better get up there with some butane heaters; the ones the football players have on the sidelines would be nice.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is a common misunderstanding of the global warming phenomenon. GW predicts an increase in the average global temperature. The theory does not say we should expect balmy tropical winters. In fact, GW predicts increasingly extreme weather, overall trending towards higher temperatures but locally and in the short term extremes both toward hot and cold as a result of disruptions in large-scale climate patterns like oceanic currents and precipitation cycles:

    http://www.edf.org/documents/4418_MythsvFacts_05.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes, JD, I'm aware of that explanation. But I wanted to draw attention to your comic timing.

    And it's not as if there's not another side to the argument.

    ReplyDelete
  7. JD said:
    ---
    GW predicts an increase in the average global temperature.
    ---

    Which, for reasons I've pointed out, is impossible to determine.

    ReplyDelete
  8. There's never been a theory with more empirical evidence than global warming. If the globe is warming, that's evidence of global warming, and if the globe is cooling, that's also evidence of global warming. If we have record highs, that's evidence of global warming, and if we have record lows, that's also evidence of global warming. What more could you want?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Steve,

    Clearly, it's all evidence of the coming ice age!

    ReplyDelete
  10. http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597

    http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/pages/the-deniers.aspx

    http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport

    http://www.uncommondescent.com/category/global-warming/

    ReplyDelete
  11. BTW. of JD wants to get into an argument over global warming, he should debate Josh Strodtbeck:

    http://metalutheran.blogspot.com/search?q=global+warming

    ReplyDelete
  12. What exactly is at stake in this whole debate?

    I am currnetly starting a class on Enviormental Biology and am interested to know why my professor pushes this whole global warming agenda......

    ReplyDelete
  13. RLE,

    For the ulterior motives of the global warming lobby, here's a place to start:

    http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-environmentalismaseligion.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. Here's another classic article on the subject:

    http://www.crichton-official.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html

    ReplyDelete
  15. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9875

    ReplyDelete
  16. GW advocates employ a 'heads we win, tails you lose' form of argumentation. Warmer than average? Ah ha, see? Proof of GW. Colder than average? That's proof of GW.

    There's no evidence that can be presented that will disprove GW to those that believe. They have their own religion.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Steve and EA

    GW arguments are not ad hoc. There is a very good reason why on a warming planet we should experience temperature extremes, the one that I linked to. This is not the same as just arbitrarily deciding that all evidence of climate trends is evidence of warming. GW is based on the following scientific facts:

    1) Concentration of certain gases in the atmosphere has a 'greenhouse effect' on the climate patterns of the planet by absorbing infrared radiation that would otherwise be reflected back out into space and reflecting it back down to the surface.

    2) Human industrial activity is responsible for greatly elevating the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere (not just CO2 but also CH4, NOx, etc.) because we are emitting these gases at rates greater than natural 'recycling' programs (such as photosynthesis and nitrogen activation) can compensate for.

    3) The reflected infrared radiation trapped by these gases is changing climate patterns that sustain the biosphere we take for granted: hurricanes are becoming more extreme, droughts are plaguing greater and greater portions of the temperate regions, ocean acidity is increasing, sea levels are rising...the list goes on and on. In some ways the projected average global temperature increase is just a symptom, the tip of the iceberg if you will of all these climate changes which we should be worried about.

    4) Natural mechanisms of climate change cannot account for the rapid changes that started occurring just as the industrial revolution gathered steam, except in an ironic way: it is by mimicking and amplifying natural processes for releasing greenhouse gases that we are changing the Earth's climate.

    I read the links you provided. Their obsession with keeping CO2 from being branded a pollutant is amusing and entirely misconstrues the reason why CO2 emissions should be contained. It's not a pollutant in the sense that if you breathe air with it you get sick or die like carbon monoxide, but it is a pollutant when too high concentrations of it in the atmosphere (together with methane, nitrous oxides and other gases which most global warming skeptics ignore, even though methane is 20 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2 and NOx more powerful still). Oh, and as for the greater role played by water vapor in the greenhouse effect: we're contributing to its increase too with the vapors from cooling towers.

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/bookshelf/brochures/greenhouse/Chapter1.htm
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/category/climate-science/greenhouse-gases/

    And while we're playing the bulverizing game, one might ask why global warming skepticism so often comes from scientists affiliated with business-friendly and business-funded think-tanks. Clearly they do not like the idea of greater environmental controls which would chip away at their profits. If environmentalism is the religion of nature-reverence, global warming skepticism reflects the creed of the ruthless capitalist: growth, growth and more growth, whatever the social and environmental consequences of this growth are.

    ReplyDelete
  18. JD,

    I will stipulate (temporarily) that all of what you cite is accurate.

    What is the "average temperature" of the Earth supposed to be? How is it measured? And what specific reductions must be made over what time period to achieve the "desired" results?

    As far as financially self-serving scientific interest is concerned, why is it that so many scientists that rely on grants and other monies contributed by ideologically driven constituencies come down on the side of AGW?

    ReplyDelete
  19. JD states,

    And while we're playing the bulverizing game, one might ask why global warming skepticism so often comes from scientists affiliated with business-friendly and business-funded think-tanks. Clearly they do not like the idea of greater environmental controls which would chip away at their profits. If environmentalism is the religion of nature-reverence, global warming skepticism reflects the creed of the ruthless capitalist: growth, growth and more growth, whatever the social and environmental consequences of this growth are.

    Two can play at that game:

    http://mises.org/story/2571

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yeah I'd seen an article that explained the reason why the global warming was real and which are its causes( for example the excessive pollution, the dams, scientific experiments)and I remember that because it was the first time I bought viagra online , so we have to wake up, and make something to stop it.

    ReplyDelete