Mike Luckovich for January 08, 2014

Looks like Luckovich is a convert to the Church of Gorebal Warming…

The if Gore repeated it, it must not be true camp will be in full swing on this toon.

FYI, most of the rest of the world is having it pretty hot just now. The weather outside your door is not universal.

I think Mike’s being awfully kind to the protestors in this cartoon: sure, the spelling on the signs is crude, but at least all the words appear to be in the same language.

That’s exactly the point. GLOBAL warming refers to the average temperature of the GLOBE (the earth). Average means the temperature in all the different places added together and divided by the number of places. With the average temperature of our atmosphere increasing, weather patterns are changing, so in many parts of the world, what has been “normal” weather for centuries is changing. Predictions of local weather in any particular place are even more difficult than before, but based on the rising global AVERAGE temperature and the continually increasing amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, it is easy to predict that the trend will continue and the average global temperature will continue to rise, causing continued severe and unpredictable weather.

I would be very happy to be convinced that the climate is not changing rapidly and that human actions have nothing to do with the change. But as of now, the evidence I see in favor of the theory of global climate change is persuasive. But I’m not closed minded on the issue.+If any who disagree with the theory of global climate change have substantive points backed up by references to real science, then I will read what you have to contribute. Those who argue for the theory have a lot of science they can put forward. Do the opponents? If not, what is the basis for your opinion? If you don’t have a good basis in science for your opinion, then why are you so convinced?

“Low intelligence global warming believers now can weigh in why we should believe in their false data and websites.”~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You’re not very good at looking at the big picture, are you?"

What about the low intelligence of those that believed Al Gore and his prediction of the ice cap being gone in five years?

Science is a process where one makes observations, forms a theory makes predictions and observes whether or not the predictions work in reality. (“Many a beautiful theory has dies a cruel and unusual death at the hands of one little inconvenient fact”) The problem with the Global Warming Theories is that so many predictions have been made which do not work out that the theory is questioned, as it should be.

Global Warming (now called “Climate Change”) is a invention of uber-left advocates of global wealth redistribution that was intended to start a public hysteria that would culminate in the passage of Cap & Trade.

Except a few things went wrong:The global warmists were caught manipulating weather data and feeding it into deliberately biased climate models that predicted imminent catastrophic temperature increases, meting polar ice caps, melting glacieirs, sea level rising hundreds of feet, and polar bears drowning.

And then the real data showed that the earth wasn’t warming, but, if anything, headed into a cooling cycle. Seas weren’t rising, polar bears weren’t drowning, all the glaciers weren’t melting.

Then a bunch uber-left loyalist went down to the Antarctic with intent to claim that the annual summer ice cap melt around the edges was proof of global warming (ignoring the fact that the the polar ice cap melt refreezes in the antarctic winter), and promptly got their entire ship frozen in the refreezing ice cap.

But I’ll give the global warmist credit for some things — being persistently self-deceptive and stupidly blind to reality.

Ah, all the global warming deniers who are suddenly experts on the scientific method, shaking their heads about AGW — without a SHRED OF EVIDENCE!For God’s sake, folks, speaking as a scientist, until you bother to propose some genuine, fact-based criticisms with legitimate science behind them instead of warmed-over Limbaughesque bloviation, don’t expect to convince anyone actually reading the evidence and the science.SuperMax52 wrote: “Think my way or you’re nut jobs, is that about it?” DO you call someone who consistently denies reality despite compelling evidence?

science is not unassailable facts but what we believe to be true today. it could all change tomorrow, just like the weather and that is your inconvenient truth for the day

I am well educated and have an engineering / technical background and believe that the scientists claiming anthroprogenic CO2 is the primary driving force behind climate change are full of bull feces.There are numerous other potential sources of change natural and man-made that could be driving it that are being essentially ignored.When I see the money being pushed to research on CO2 as a cause I tend to smell a rat. That is, many researchers are following the money much like consultants do rather than doing good empirical unprejudiced research..I see politics and money driving Gorebal Warming and the CO2 meme rather than good science and therefore heap derision on the concept.

Gorebal is my derisive term for Global Warming. Since I made it clear that I do heap derision on the idea that anthropormorphic CO2 is driving climate change I would have hoped you go that. Obviously, it escaped your attention..So you list some government agencies funded by the government and driven first and foremost by politics….I would point to the IPCC and even your own links’ problems with modelling that they have and are having over the long term. For example the IPCC predicted that by 2010 there would be millions upon millions of “climate refugees” forced out of their places of living by rising seas, droughts, or other climate change. Hasn’t happened.Temperature modelling based on CO2 are not working and don’t track with the last 15 years of global climate now..I give as three alternatives to CO2:.Changing albedo of the Earth.ContrailsCarnot heat engine theory..Just because these don’t get funding like CO2 research does doesn’t make them wrong or irrelevant. That is the bottom line here: Politics drives CO2 research rather than science.

Iced TEA drinkers, good toon.

Looks like Luckovich struck a nerve with the RWNJ crowd.

I appreciate the many people posting intelligent responses to climate deniers who have no interest in science or reason. However, you are wasting your time arguing with those who have been told what to believe by the monied interests. Obviously, none of them have children or grandchildren, or they would have a shred of concern that this might be true. Or else they know the Koch brothers will take care of their children if it proves to be correct.

Good luck with that.

People are a part of nature, too.

Almost all of the Global Rapid Climate Change deniers here (and even a few of the supporters also) are actually missing the point. The point I would have to make is that “IS THE CONTINUED BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS THAT GENERATE HUMAN MADE POLLUTION A GOOD THING FOR HUMANITY, NOW AND ESPECIALLY IN THE FUTURE?” The deniers are especially saying “Oh yes, that pollution is good for us!”.

They miss the point entirely, the point being that there are already entirely too many reasons to stop polluting the atmosphere by stopping the burning of fossil fuel, without regard to Global Rapid Climate change! And this IS especially true in the US!!

It is especially true for the US as if we continue to burn fossil fuels for energy and transportation at a rate that is greater than the rate we can find those fuels, we will continue to be dependent upon other far more unstable areas such as the Middle East. This would be reason enough for the US to stop burning these materials!!

Then there is the simple fact that burning these very precious materials is just about the worst possible use for them anyway. These materials are indeed the basis for our very civilization. They are used for lubrication, and cutting oils in our manufacturing industries. They are the absolute basis for the plastic industries ( take a look at your computers and see just what they would be like without such materials, if you don’t want to believe me!), they are even the basis for many medicines, and even fertilizers for the growing of foods! So, burning them up into the atmosphere just as fast as we seemingly can, is just plain stupid. IF we care for the future at all they should be saved for that future!

Polluting the atmosphere is also a major cause of the increase in health care costs. I am fully aware of this as I suffer myself from chronic bronchitis. Lung diseases are still on the increase even with the decline of smoking. And pollution in the atmosphere has got to be a major reason for this!

Finally, even if the human caused element of Rapid Global Climate Change is relatively small, it is continuous, and eventually may very well tip the natural equilibrium of nature to make the good Earth we live upon uninhabitable for humanity as well as most other living creatures. Is this the future we want to give our descendants???

This is NOT being alarmist at all, it is just being truthful and concerned!!

Your closely reasoned logic has convinced me instantly.(sarc)

And this says nothing about the mode average Dem voter. For more evidence see Chicago/New Orleans, etc murders.

Where can I get some $$$ for my heating bill?