Signe Wilkinson by Signe Wilkinson

Signe Wilkinson

Comments (23) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. PianoGuy24

    PianoGuy24 GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago

    Yeah…it’s called the SUN you global warming alarmist whackos! Especialy since the sun just had a record setting sun flare and the axis of the Earth is poised perfectly during this time of year to get the brunt of it’s full effects! Just TELL me how man caused the Sun to do that, and how man can prevent it from HAPPENING! (Hint: holding signs and blaming co2 ain’t it…)

  2. AshburnStadium

    AshburnStadium said, over 4 years ago


    Was the sun having solar flares this past winter? How about the winter that never was in 2011-12? I clearly remember only three “blizzards” of 3" each in central Pennsylvania. We rarely even had a cold day last “winter” – highs were usually in the 50s or 60s, when the normal high was under 40ºF.

  3. Ransom D Stone

    Ransom D Stone said, over 4 years ago

    Human you said it all. We need to heed and respond NOW.

  4. iangoodson

    iangoodson said, over 4 years ago

    Yawn. There’s a kink in the jet-stream ( google it) which is keeping summer in the Atlantic and we, in the UK and Europe, are getting more rain in a day , for days on end, than we usuallly get in a month at this time of year. Neither is it particularly warm. The average temperature for the globe AS A WHOLE hasn’t changed up in over a decade, in fact it’s moved down a lttle. It may be hot in the USA but the USA is not theworld, despite what some of you think.

  5. win

    win said, over 4 years ago

    but it’s a dry heat…

  6. cdward

    cdward said, over 4 years ago

    I presume that means you should never assume anything either. And it is asinine to assume that our activity – you know, burning coal and oil – has no impact on the environment. To simply say “It’s the sun” is simple-minded at best. To say there are cycles ignores the fact that the cycles are occurring much faster and much more violently than ever in history.

  7. SpicyNacho

    SpicyNacho GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago


    We have been recording weather for 100 plus years, and the earth has been around how long? I do care for the planet, but not for alarmist crooks that are looking to get rich off this crisis.

  8. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 4 years ago

    Wow. @PianoGuy24, @iangoodson, @SpicyNacho, let me reorient you a tad.
    Contrary to what you seem to believe, we actually know a good deal about the climate when related to the sun. That is why there was some thought that we would be going into an ice age. But in fact we are getting warmer — warmer than can be accounted for by solar activity — and this is anomalous compared to the Earth’s patterns of the past. (See, for example, tree rings and even ice cores that go back 100,000 years. We know a lot more about climate and weather patterns than “100 plus years.”)
    The initial idea of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) was first proposed by Svante Arrhenius in 1896. (EIGHTEEN ninety-six.) It’s not new. But in the 1960s there began to be evidence that warming was occurring, and it was happening faster than you would expect from natural climate change, and further it paralleled extremely closely with man-made activity that put more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
    The effects of this are complex, but there is general, comprehensive agreement from actual climate scientists that warming IS occurring, and that a significant percentage of it IS from human-based activity (including but NOT limited to: increased CO2 from burning fossil fuels, decreased carbon sequestration due to deforestation, pollution and now saturated oceans; increased methane from breeding lots of cattle, etc.).
    The debate has moved on to “how fast, and is there a tipping point, and have we already crossed it?”
    Some of the research is investigating specific effects (as opposed to overall global temperature increase, which is already clearly there), which includes shifting of the jet stream and for that matter the Gulf Stream due to increased energy in the atmosphere, which in turn will lead to a plethora of weather changes: some places will get colder; most will get hotter; some will get drier, etc.
    There may be “alarmist crooks that are looking to get rich off this crisis,” but this is not by any means representative of the 97% of climate scientists who are in agreement with the phenomenon of AGW and researching it. If you think that, you don’t know what scientists are paid.
    We DO know that there are a FEW who are getting rich, and interestingly the majority of them work for oil and gas companies. Next time you see some “eminent scientist” claiming it is a hoax, check his or her background out. 95% of the time, you will find a link.
    So you might want to reconsider this strange demonization of science, fed by those who benefit from it.

  9. pirate227

    pirate227 said, over 4 years ago

    For the record, the DC metro area broke it’s record of continuous days over 95.
    Eleven days, folks. And yes that is since they’ve been recording the weather.

  10. MurphyHerself

    MurphyHerself said, over 4 years ago

    It ain’t Faux News:)

  11. charliekane

    charliekane said, over 4 years ago

    Deniers, take heart!
    There is no link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer.
    Is there?

  12. spyderred

    spyderred said, over 4 years ago

    Folks love to just “believe” because there’s no need for effort. The erudite explanations above are the pearls spread before the willfully ignorant who prefer the ease of belief rather than the effort and uncertainty on occasion engendered by actual knowledge.

  13. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, over 4 years ago

    I don’t typically watch any channel for news and especially not science news. I learned long ago that the total transcript of a television news show would cover one and one-half columns of print of one page in the New York Times.
    I use the Web, of course, but I also target specific sites for hard-core science information, e.g., (heavy going for me as a social scientist), the National Council on Science Education ( for the more accessible version, and so forth.

  14. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 4 years ago

    Small things can have big consequences, a bullet is one example, chemical changes tipped from stasis are another. Finding the proper catalyst may be good, or very, very, bad, and it is only a tiny component of the reaction, with major consequences!

  15. ARodney

    ARodney said, over 4 years ago

    The debate has long been over except for fact-deniers like Harley and Ima. Have you looked at the data? It’s overwhelming, probably why even Exxon has given in and agreed that the observed heating of the earth is caused by carbon dioxide. For the past ten years we’ve been setting “hottest” temperature records at SEVEN TIMES the rate of coldest temperature records, because we’re making the planet hotter, and it’s already getting too hot to reliably grow food on. The “capitalist” solution would be to have a carbon tax, and use the income to lower corporate and payroll taxes. The very least we can do is eliminate special tax breaks for oil companies, but the Republicans are too cowardly even to do that.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (8).