Years Ago Democrats Said No Snow Proved Global Warming

[red states rule]

Listen to the Dems on the floor of Congress in 2002

<embed src="http://blip.tv/play/hJNRgcS7EQI%2Em4v" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="364" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed>

So which is it? Does a lack of snow mean global warming - or does excessive snow mean global warming?

[Kathianne]

50 states with some snow on each! LOL!

European papers are all over the climategate story. US MSM ignores at their continued peril.

[red states rule]

50 states with some snow on each! LOL!

European papers are all over the climategate story. US MSM ignores at their continued peril.

They can ignore it is they wish Kathianne, but the people digging out from it are not

The very defensive, and insulting, reaction from the global warming salespeople to those pointing out the harsh winter is very telling, isn't it?

[Kathianne]

They can ignore it is they wish Kathianne, but the people digging out from it are not

The very defensive, and insulting, reaction from the global warming salespeople to those pointing out the harsh winter is very telling, isn't it?

I said that they ignored 'at their peril.' I implied that it was telling.

[red states rule]

I said that they ignored 'at their peril.' I implied that it was telling.

OK

It is much the same reaction my liberal co-worker have been giving me. He asks "What month is it?" or "It snows in Febuary"

When I remind him what the "leaders" of the global warming movement had predicited as far a less snow and warmer winters, he gets very upset and lectures how the Earth is warming, and people like me do not care

People are not buying it as their backs ache from all the shoveling, no more then they are no longer buying the "Blame Bush" excuses

[Kathianne]

OK

It is much the same reaction my liberal co-worker have been giving me. He asks "What month is it?" or "It snows in Febuary"

When I remind him what the "leaders" of the global warming movement had predicited as far a less snow and warmer winters, he gets very upset and lectures how the Earth is warming, and people like me do not care

People are not buying it as their backs ache from all the shoveling, no more then they are no longer buying the "Blame Bush" excuses

Who's reaction is my like your 'liberal co-worker'? I'm unclear regarding your point here.

[red states rule]

Who's reaction is my like your 'liberal co-worker'? I'm unclear regarding your point here.

He is dismissing how bad the winter is, while at the same time pushing the global warming agenda

Even as we walked thru the parking lot at work with snow piled about 8 feet high, and looking like a scene from the North Pole, he was telling me how the Earth is warming

The liberal media is doing the same. "Yes, there was 3 feet of snow in DC, but that does not disprove global warming"

[Kathianne]

He is dismissing how bad the winter is, while at the same time pushing the global warming agenda

Even as we walked thru the parking lot at work with snow piled about 8 feet high, and looking like a scene from the North Pole, he was telling me how the Earth is warming

The liberal media is doing the same. "Yes, there was 3 feet of snow in DC, but that does not disprove global warming"

I'm putting money on they are going to pay a price for ignoring the problems with the AGW agenda. The weather is just another nail in the coffin in favor of cyclical weather patterns, with documentation of different sorts going back to middle ages.

[red states rule]

I'm putting money on they are going to pay a price for ignoring the problems with the AGW agenda. The weather is just another nail in the coffin in favor of cyclical weather patterns, with documentation of different sorts going back to middle ages.

They will also want to put our money on Cap and Tax. Trillions of new tax increases, and millons of job will be wiped out

Like Obamacare, Dems will ignore the facts. Ignore the people. And hopefully will lose the debate before they can put their agenda in place

Dems can only hope for massive snow storms across all 49 states on Election Day in Novemeber to save them from the wrath of the voters

[Kathianne]

Why MSM also imperils itself if not reporting on AGW problems:

Just follow the money:

Climategate, UK Edition: Following the Money, All ?4 Trillion of It - Big Journalism (http://bigjournalism.com/otockfield/2010/02/12/climategate-uk-edition-following-the-money-all-e4-trillion-of-it/)


...But hard-core warmists, intent on skepticizing the skeptics, invariably ask: “why would the media go along with this poppycock?”
Yes, why are the media so invested in the warming notion, given the countervailing evidence, the fact that the last climate theory (the global cooling scare of the 1970s) was so quickly disproven, and that it is self-evident that CO2, that most persecuted of molecules, is essential for life… for plant life. (When an elephant sighs, a tree smiles.)



Well, the BBC, a prime proponents of warming theory, or AGW, has heavily invested its pension fund in the theory, and thus have had a major non-Scientific reason for their bias. As revealed this weekend in The Express [6]:

The corporation is under investigation after being inundated with complaints that its editorial coverage of climate change is biased in favour of those who say it is a man-made phenomenon. The £8billion pension fund is likely to come under close scrutiny over its commitment to promote a low-carbon economy while struggling to reverse an estimated £2billion deficit. Concerns are growing that BBC journalists and their bosses regard disputed scientific theory that climate change is caused by mankind as “mainstream” while huge sums of employees’ money is invested in companies whose success depends on the theory being widely accepted. The BBC is the only media organisation in Britain whose pension fund is a member of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, which has more than 50 members across Europe.

The IIGCC is an interesting group. As their website explains [7]:

The IIGCC is a forum for collaboration on climate change for European investors. The group’s objective is to catalyse greater investment in a low carbon economy by bringing investors together to use their collective influence with companies, policymakers and investors. The group currently has over 50 members, including some of the largest pension funds and asset managers in Europe, and represents assets of around €4 trillion.

Wait… I hate to be a skeptic, but did they just say… “Four Trillion Euros”?

They did.

The Chairman of IIGCC investment group is Peter Dunscombe, who also happens to be the BBC’s Head of Pensions Investment.

Cui bono, my friend, cui bono?

Then there are a few admissions:

http://i48.tinypic.com/2wqsx1c.jpg


...Did anyone else just hear the “bump-bump” of the Jones bus running right over the infamous Hockey Stick?

Dr. Phil Jones, the man at the center of the Climategate scandal, has for the first time admitted that the Medieval Warm Period could have been warmer than the present day, flying directly in the face of the stupid Hocleystick Graph that caused so much of the Climate panic in the first place. From the BBC report, titled “Climate data ‘not well organised“:


Phil Jones, the professor behind the “Climategate” affair, has admitted some of his decades-old weather data was not well enough organised.

He said this contributed to his refusal to share raw data with critics – a decision he says he regretted.

But Professor Jones said he had not cheated the data, or unfairly influenced the scientific process.

He said he stood by the view that recent climate warming was most likely predominantly man-made.

But he agreed that two periods in recent times had experienced similar warming. And he agreed that the debate had not been settled over whether the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the current period.

Here is why that is important. If there was a warmer Medieval Warm Period, then the current warming could be more likely due to natural variation, instead of CO2 and man-made. as the models don’t account for this earlier warmer condition. At the very least, the “certainty” and of doom and gloom warming predictions is overstated, as the world may have been warmer and the world didn’t end.

[Abbey Marie]

Years Ago Democrats Said No Snow Proved Global Warming

http://bergina.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/hyena-laughing.jpg


http://doostang.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/george-bush-laughing.jpg

http://www.principalspage.com/theblog/wp-content/uploads//2008/08/laughing_horse.jpg

[red states rule]

As you know I love cats Abbey.

http://mine.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/Believinginglo128439919139536056.jpg

[sgtdmski]

Yunz must not have gotten the memo!!!!

It is no longer global warming, but rather climate change. Hmmm more snow in DC and the likes actually supports the claim of climate change. Sorry folks, but this argument under the new terms and bullshit being used is null and void!!!!!!

Oh well, maybe one of these days they will get it right.

I mean come on folks how can we trust any data on the weather when the local weather people cannot get a 3 - 5 day forecast right???? So why should we believe anything that talks about years in the future when they cannot even get days in the future correct????

dmk

[HogTrash]

Regardless of what turn the weather takes, democrats will claim it is evidence of Global Warming. :dunno:

[actsnoblemartin]

what their is no cause for alarm, dont look behind the curtain

if you deny global warming, your denying the holocaust

sincerely

al bore


They can ignore it is they wish Kathianne, but the people digging out from it are not

The very defensive, and insulting, reaction from the global warming salespeople to those pointing out the harsh winter is very telling, isn't it?

[Luna Tick]

50 states with some snow on each! LOL!

European papers are all over the climategate story. US MSM ignores at their continued peril.

Actually, it's 49 states with snow. There is none in Hawaii. And some dumb remarks made in the past about lack of snow do not disprove global warming any more than showing that Al Gore acted like a jerk does.

Climate and weather are not the same thing. Weather is a temporary situation. Global warming science is about average temperatures rising over time. It does not mean there will never be any blizzards or that lakes will never freeze over in Minnesota anymore.

Here's are some articles about it:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/01/08/once-again-cold-weather-doesnt-disprove-global-warming/

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1806418/does_recent_cold_weather_discredit_global_warming/

It's about the science. It's not about the Democrats. It's not about Al Gore.

[Kathianne]

Actually, it's 49 states with snow. There is none in Hawaii. And some dumb remarks made in the past about lack of snow do not disprove global warming any more than showing that Al Gore acted like a jerk does.

Climate and weather are not the same thing. Weather is a temporary situation. Global warming science is about average temperatures rising over time. It does not mean there will never be any blizzards or that lakes will never freeze over in Minnesota anymore.

Here's are some articles about it:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/01/08/once-again-cold-weather-doesnt-disprove-global-warming/

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1806418/does_recent_cold_weather_discredit_global_warming/

It's about the science. It's not about the Democrats. It's not about Al Gore.

Actually heard that HA had some snow at tops of high mountains. That should count. ;)

Oh the science thingy, it's the 'believers of climate change' that are sounding like flat earthers, quoting 'other studies' while ignoring they were based on the data from CPU and IPCC, (again based upon CPU). It's not that the skeptics are saying that the theory is wrong, it's that serious studies have not been done, scientifically.

[red states rule]

Actually heard that HA had some snow at tops of high mountains. That should count. ;)

Oh the science thingy, it's the 'believers of climate change' that are sounding like flat earthers, quoting 'other studies' while ignoring they were based on the data from CPU and IPCC, (again based upon CPU). It's not that the skeptics are saying that the theory is wrong, it's that serious studies have not been done, scientifically.

I hope Luna Tick paid attention. There will be a test later :laugh2:

[red states rule]

A breif history of the left global warming hystera - and even the race card is played

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xdnzpr4z4z" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=Xdnzpr4z4z" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>