Now that winter is drawing near (northern hemisphere), I see the global warming chatter has died down (right on cue).

I guess since the global temps haven't gone anywhere in the past 16 years, their doubling down on their predictions. When everyone stops listening, grab headlines anyway you can.

I have air conditioning AND heat. I covered no matter which way this goes.

Zoo Keeper wrote:

I guess since the global temps haven't gone anywhere in the past 16 years, their doubling down on their predictions. When everyone stops listening, grab headlines anyway you can.

Impressive. You both misused and correctly used the word "their" with only three words in between. It takes a real moron/genius to pull that one off.

What is the source of your "past 16 years" claim? (I know the answer is "the hole between my butt cheeks" but I am curious to see what you'll say.)

I checked the data from NCDC. I live in an area in the U.S. in which the rate of change, per century, is zero, actually 0.0 degrees C. I used to live about ten states from here, where the rate of change per century is 0.8 degrees C. I am not a scientist, but I am not hysterical about those rates. I don't debate them. I don't fear them. I do oppose funding "programs," taking advantage of the manufactured hysteria over this issue. This land mass, and its people, have bigger problems, particularly less hyped ones.

The hysteria over "global warming," or the focus group tested "climate change," will be one of the things that makes future generations laugh at how primitive we were, afraid of such a slight change, especially in comparison with greater changes in this planet's discernable history.

Heroin and cocaine flood into the U.S., runining tens of thousands of lives every year, while electied officials and law enforcement collect payoffs to let the flow continue, but our collective worry is a degree, or less, per century. Really? Carbon tax? How about taxing the prison systems that profit from the inevitable results of the drug trade. 2011's flow is 2012's new prisoners, new drug treatment patients, etc. How about jailing the police chiefs of the communites where every drug runner knows he can bring a truckload, or car load and the police are his partners?

Global Warming Hysteria wrote:

...

Heroin and cocaine flood into the U.S., runining tens of thousands of lives every year, while electied officials and law enforcement collect payoffs to let the flow continue, but our collective worry is a degree, or less, per century. Really? Carbon tax? How about taxing the prison systems that profit from the inevitable results of the drug trade. 2011's flow is 2012's new prisoners, new drug treatment patients, etc. How about jailing the police chiefs of the communites where every drug runner knows he can bring a truckload, or car load and the police are his partners?

Hijacking is a serious crime.

THE Police wrote:

Hijacking is a serious crime.

Yes, and the fact that it almost never occurs any more is proof that drug trafficing enforcement is half-hearted, or worse.

As far as hijscking of discussion, I made the point first. This warming hysteria hijacks discussion of many, many more serious things.

The more difficult you make it to import drugs, the more expensive drugs become, the more money there is to be made in the drug trade, the more violent the drug trade becomes. There you have the drug war's abject failure in a nutshell.

Anyway, it has nothing to do with global warming.

Global Warming Hysteria wrote:

I am not a scientist

You should have posted just this, or nothing at all. Even if you weren't just talking out of your ass, you clearly have no idea how much of a difference a rise in ocean temperature of "only" 0.8 C (about 1.44 degrees Fahrenheit) can make.

So, I suggest you either learn a few things or slam your mouth shut, never to open it again on this or any related topic. Thanks!

Bart Lahr wrote:

[quote]Zoo Keeper wrote:

I guess since the global temps haven't gone anywhere in the past 16 years, their doubling down on their predictions. When everyone stops listening, grab headlines anyway you can.[quote]

Impressive. You both misused and correctly used the word "their" with only three words in between. It takes a real moron/genius to pull that one off.

What is the source of your "past 16 years" claim? (I know the answer is "the hole between my butt cheeks" but I am curious to see what you'll say.)

Easy to find if you search under global warming stopped...

The dude abides wrote:

Easy to find if you search under global warming stopped...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html

Sorry, but the Daily Mail is to journalistic integrity what "Schindler's List" is to comedy, and David Rose is a nutcase:

You will not find any credible climate scientists agreeing with the "not in 16 years" idea, any more than no scientists other than fringe Christian "biologists" deny evolution.

2012 is soon to become the warmest ever on record, and most of the hottest years since humans started keeping track are in the past two decades.

Even if you believe that these changes are independent of human activity, to state that warming is not occurring requires blatant dishonesty or a crippling lack of analytical skill.

Pediatric gynecologist wrote:

...Even if you believe that these changes are independent of human activity, to state that warming is not occurring requires blatant dishonesty or a crippling lack of analytical skill.

So?

Pediatric gynecologist wrote:

Even if you weren't just talking out of your ass, you clearly have no idea how much of a difference a rise in ocean temperature of "only" 0.8 C (about 1.44 degrees Fahrenheit) can make.

So, I suggest you either learn a few things or slam your mouth shut, never to open it again on this or any related topic. Thanks!

You must be great with kids.

Global Warming Hysteria wrote:

Pediatric gynecologist wrote:

Even if you weren't just talking out of your ass, you clearly have no idea how much of a difference a rise in ocean temperature of "only" 0.8 C (about 1.44 degrees Fahrenheit) can make.

So, I suggest you either learn a few things or slam your mouth shut, never to open it again on this or any related topic. Thanks!

You must be great with kids.

I can see how that is very germane to the topic at hand. Thank you for your contribution.

oheo wrote:

the proper terminology is "climate change". get with it.

We changed it to "climate change" once the earth stopped warming. We're very clever--it's foolproof. If the earth warms, it's climate change. If the earth cools, it's climate change. If there are more storms, it's climate change. Fewer storms--climate change. We can ALWAYS get our research money this way.

Its sill unusually warm here (North East near Philly).

I could walk out in shorts the other day. I expect it to stay warm up to Thanksgiving then cool down significantly.

Should be a short warm winter.

Did you people know that Ohio was once partially covered by a glacier and that some areas of the state were below sea level?

Now that they have all melted, you would think that Ohio should be fully under water but we are at 1100-1300 ft elevation.

Very interesting.

Pediatric gynecologist wrote:

[quote]The dude abides wrote:

Easy to find if you search under global warming stopped...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html

[quote]

Sorry, but the Daily Mail is to journalistic integrity what "Schindler's List" is to comedy, and David Rose is a nutcase:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=&authornamef=David+Rose

You will not find any credible climate scientists agreeing with the "not in 16 years" idea, any more than no scientists other than fringe Christian "biologists" deny evolution.

2012 is soon to become the warmest ever on record, and most of the hottest years since humans started keeping track are in the past two decades.

Even if you believe that these changes are independent of human activity, to state that warming is not occurring requires blatant dishonesty or a crippling lack of analytical skill.

You're attacking the source and not the data. There are plenty of other soures presenting the same data. The above link was simply the first one in a long list returned by google. Would you like to go down the list attacking each of the soures? Or would you like to focus on the data, which supports the fact that we haven't warmed in 16 years, and every model that said we would was wrong. The admission of anything less than that would be blatantly dishonest.

If you had a good source, you should have posted it instead of the Daily Mail. A good source would be a study published in a a peer reviewed Journal.

There's a lot of crap on both sides of the issue (which is usually the case).

My favorite was when we had a colder than normal winter a few years ago and people were saying this is exactly what you should expect with global warming, as well as cooler than normal summers.

The problem is nobody ever said that was a symptom of global warming until it actually happened.

So to summarize, if temps are above normal, it's global warming. If they are below normal, it's global warming. I think I get it now.