Global Warming? My A$$ Its Cold Outside

It is amazing that despite the scientific evidence supporting anthropogenic global warming people use a cold spell as evidence that glonbal warming is false. The first three weeks of the 2013 calender year where all well above average, that doesn't prove or disprove climate change either. The long term trends we are seeing in both temperature and precipitation patterns are what should be disturbing people.

True. Although there are plenty enough people who do the opposite and blame every hot spell or hurricane on "global warming caused by man"

Facts. I love them. This is dead on.

I find it interesting that it's actually thermal expansion of water that causes sea level rise, and not the melting of ice caps.

Thermal expansion is probably one of the strongest indicators of global warming. Since the specific heat of water is high compared to surrounding surfaces it takes a much larger amount of heat to raise the temperature of water.

FRPLG,

You are correct. Any short term weather pattern is not and should not be used as evidence. I guess I did a poor job of stating that. Maybe a little bias on my part. :cheeky-sm

Yes, I am a dummy.


Fixed. :cheeky-sm



Most people still trying to deny global warming are doing so that they can continue profiting from destroying the planet. Either that, or they aren't educated enough to understand science and most likely believe everything that corporate media tells them.

Fixed. :cheeky-sm



Most people still trying to deny global warming are doing so that they can continue profiting from destroying the planet. Either that, or they aren't educated enough to understand science and most likely believe everything that corporate media tells them.

There are dummies all over. The are also smart people who know what they're talking about. On both sides of the issue.

This is one issue where there's a serious generational gap. Being older makes you stupid in this arena. 30 somethings and younger came up with global warming being heavily taught in Earth science classes in middle schools and high schools, the science behind the concept is so basic that 7th graders get it easily. 60 somethings have barely even heard of the concept.

Being old and curmudgeonly, naturally the old heads dismiss media reports they've never heard about.

I used to be with it, then they changed what "it" was!

There are dummies all over. The are also smart people who know what they're talking about. On both sides of the issue.

Oh I know, I'm just teasing FD a bit.

Not too sure where I stand totally but I have read enough to know this...the entire debate has been politicized and there is unbelievable bias on each side. Too often "facts" on each side are not actually real facts but suppositions masquerading as facts. The facts seem to be this...warming is happening although its extent is debated. Why that warming is happening isn't positively known. Those who believe it is caused by humans base there beliefs on models. Models made by humans...who believe in man-made warming. Even they'll admit the models aren't right. How wrong they are matters. If they're just wrong in terms of degree then they're basic theories are correct but skeptics accurately point out that only one of the myriad of reasons they believe the models are wrong has to be right to totally invalidate the theories. Alas, some more reasonable skeptics make some good points. If you're a denier then you're definitely wrong because the skeptics don't have more scientifically proven causes either.

Right, But my argument here is that the "Skeptics", side of the argument is given equal air time and validity for a variety of reasons. One of those reasons being the media's pattern or tenancy to provide a point, counter-point format. Ie, giving two sides of an issue equal air time and validity when their needs to exist a discrepancy between the two to actually present the facts more objectively. Would it make much sense to discuss the moon landing with equal breath to the conspiracy theorists? No.

Obviously there are outside pressures influencing this- and I think it's to credit your point about this issue being so heavily politicized... but from a purely scientific standpoint- this is a non-issue. The overwhelming majority of climatologists have a consensus.

This is one issue where there's a serious generational gap. Being older makes you stupid in this arena. 30 somethings and younger came up with global warming being heavily taught in Earth science classes in middle schools and high schools, the science behind the concept is so basic that 7th graders get it easily. 60 somethings have barely even heard of the concept.

Being old and curmudgeonly, naturally the old heads dismiss media reports they've never heard about.

I used to be with it, then they changed what "it" was!

The older generation is still stuck on all that science about global cooling.

Fixed. :cheeky-sm



Most people still trying to deny global warming are doing so that they can continue profiting from destroying the planet. Either that, or they aren't educated enough to understand science and most likely believe everything that corporate media tells them.

You don't think Al and his buddies have not profitted from global warming. Trillions have been made of global warming and there are trillions more that will be made so that argument deos not flush. Its corporate media that has pushed global warming so that also does not work.

Just to be clear most all agree the earth is in a warming cycle we just disagree with the cause.

Its a cycle like FD said.
Unless its not true the Great Lakes were covered in glaciers......