Yup. Look out below AND above. We’ve had more strange and wild weather in the last year or so than ever before, and it continues. My brother’s barn in upstate New York was torn apart by an EF2 tornado in mid November when it should have been snowing. We ain’t seen nothin’ yet…
What gets me is we can have a January without snow on the Eastern seaboard and a massive heat wave across the midwest during the summer and the righties will refuse to accept that as proof the that our climate is changing due to warming temps worldwide.
But the first time they wake up and see -0 degree temperatures outside their OWN door, THAT"S enough to debunk the idea of global warming.
Here in Texas, our Repubs are doing all they can to keep folks ignorant. Just because it reached over 100 degrees for 90 days at Camp Mabry (previous record – 69 days in 1925, 6 of the top 10 records occurred since 2000), doesn’t mean the planet is getting warmer. Fortunately, I like hot weather.
Of course there are natural climate cycles — just as there are cycles in the economy — so if you believe that the current changes in the climate don’t have any connection to human activity, does that mean that changes in the economy also don’t have any connection to human activity?
Show me the irrefutable science that states that man is the cause of climate change.
Study the history of climate change going back several thousands of years, and you will see that these weather trends have happened before without man-made causation.
Read some of the articles at junkscience.com, especially the ones about Climategate 2.0.
I said this in another recent comic. Using local weather as an indicator either in favor of climate change, or as a disclaimer of the same is not scientific, and generally not helpful. If Toles lived in the Alps, this year, he would be singing a different toon.
What if we all got together and reduced pollution, and it turned out the climate deniers were right, and it didn’t help the problem?It would mean we’d have to suffer clean air and water for nothing, and the Republicans just don’t think it’s worth the risk.
Your number are seriously flawed. We are nowhere near the peak. We’d have to gain nearly 4 more degrees global average to reach it. At the current rate it’ll take about 30,000 years.
Saying that the next ice age is “due” is not science, since it isn’t known exactly what brings them on. What is known is that we need to reduce greenhouse gases now. It’s too late to avoid serious climate change, but we can ameliorate it. A carbon tax would be the conservative approach, if conservatives believed in anything any more.
Ice ages are largely predictable when you take into consideration that there are three different Milankovitch cycles, all with different periodicities, which may either reinforce each other or cancel each other out. It may not be a trivial calculation (like “every 45,000 years” would be trivially simple), but it is certainly doable.See, for example, this tutorial.
Why do people insist that global warming is man-made?If it exists, and it isn’t just a “natural cycle” in the weather pattern, why is it man-made?Who should get the blame if it is real, but is being caused by a natural cycle/pattern of the sun?The fact that some of the data has been faked, and that some of the so-called “experts” are in collusion only adds to the questions. The number 1 question should ALWAYS be- – -what proof is there that WE (humanity) are causing it?
It’s like blaming your cell phone manufacturer for your cell phone’s calling/connection problems when there is HIGH sun-spot activity. It is the sun-spots causing your problem, not Nokia.
Noreen, that’s a fine example of the menacing arrogance of vainglorious ignorance.When chatting with a seemingly intelligent fellow recently about the inevitability of global warming, I had him confidently assure me that Jesus would never let anything really terrible happen to us and the planet. I’ve slept SO much better knowing that. He turned out to be one of these quiverfull (Google it) types that wasn’t about to even consider that what he is doing is pig selfish and utterly irresponsible both personally and globally. He no doubt votes; I just walked away.
I don’t think citing the Alps is any different. That’s exactly my point. People on both sides of this issue use the same local weather argument. Your second point seems a bit harsh. I was just using the recent snow in the Alps as an example. I could have used the winter of 2010 in the Sierras, where snowpack exceeded 186% of base for the season, where snowfall lasted from October through May. The idea is the same. Neither side is helping their cause by citing local weather instances.
AlbertNonyMouse over 12 years ago
Yup. Look out below AND above. We’ve had more strange and wild weather in the last year or so than ever before, and it continues. My brother’s barn in upstate New York was torn apart by an EF2 tornado in mid November when it should have been snowing. We ain’t seen nothin’ yet…
Simon_Jester over 12 years ago
What gets me is we can have a January without snow on the Eastern seaboard and a massive heat wave across the midwest during the summer and the righties will refuse to accept that as proof the that our climate is changing due to warming temps worldwide.
But the first time they wake up and see -0 degree temperatures outside their OWN door, THAT"S enough to debunk the idea of global warming.
SaltWaterCroc over 12 years ago
Here in Texas, our Repubs are doing all they can to keep folks ignorant. Just because it reached over 100 degrees for 90 days at Camp Mabry (previous record – 69 days in 1925, 6 of the top 10 records occurred since 2000), doesn’t mean the planet is getting warmer. Fortunately, I like hot weather.
lonecat over 12 years ago
Of course there are natural climate cycles — just as there are cycles in the economy — so if you believe that the current changes in the climate don’t have any connection to human activity, does that mean that changes in the economy also don’t have any connection to human activity?
dougdash over 12 years ago
Show me the irrefutable science that states that man is the cause of climate change.
Study the history of climate change going back several thousands of years, and you will see that these weather trends have happened before without man-made causation.
Read some of the articles at junkscience.com, especially the ones about Climategate 2.0.
curtisls87 over 12 years ago
I said this in another recent comic. Using local weather as an indicator either in favor of climate change, or as a disclaimer of the same is not scientific, and generally not helpful. If Toles lived in the Alps, this year, he would be singing a different toon.
Yassir Thasmebebbi over 12 years ago
What if we all got together and reduced pollution, and it turned out the climate deniers were right, and it didn’t help the problem?It would mean we’d have to suffer clean air and water for nothing, and the Republicans just don’t think it’s worth the risk.
grayhares01 over 12 years ago
Too much snow = Global WarmingToo little snow = Global Warming
.
Too much rain = Global WarmingToo little rain = Global Warming
.
Too Hot = Global WarmingToo Cold = Global Warming
.
So how come the AGW crowd was so quiet the past 2 winters when we had some of the coldest temperatures on record?
.
Maybe because they have tunnel vision and have decided the results before they get the facts…
grayhares01 over 12 years ago
Your number are seriously flawed. We are nowhere near the peak. We’d have to gain nearly 4 more degrees global average to reach it. At the current rate it’ll take about 30,000 years.
d_legendary1 over 12 years ago
What do you care puppy, lamdoi, or whatever profiles you use. You’re still as virulent as ever.
ARodney over 12 years ago
Saying that the next ice age is “due” is not science, since it isn’t known exactly what brings them on. What is known is that we need to reduce greenhouse gases now. It’s too late to avoid serious climate change, but we can ameliorate it. A carbon tax would be the conservative approach, if conservatives believed in anything any more.
lbatik over 12 years ago
Ice ages are largely predictable when you take into consideration that there are three different Milankovitch cycles, all with different periodicities, which may either reinforce each other or cancel each other out. It may not be a trivial calculation (like “every 45,000 years” would be trivially simple), but it is certainly doable.See, for example, this tutorial.
agate1 over 12 years ago
500 million on Solyndra is not 6.5 billion,get a life, and lie somewhere else.
noreenklose over 12 years ago
Why do people insist that global warming is man-made?If it exists, and it isn’t just a “natural cycle” in the weather pattern, why is it man-made?Who should get the blame if it is real, but is being caused by a natural cycle/pattern of the sun?The fact that some of the data has been faked, and that some of the so-called “experts” are in collusion only adds to the questions. The number 1 question should ALWAYS be- – -what proof is there that WE (humanity) are causing it?
It’s like blaming your cell phone manufacturer for your cell phone’s calling/connection problems when there is HIGH sun-spot activity. It is the sun-spots causing your problem, not Nokia.
AlbertNonyMouse over 12 years ago
Noreen, that’s a fine example of the menacing arrogance of vainglorious ignorance.When chatting with a seemingly intelligent fellow recently about the inevitability of global warming, I had him confidently assure me that Jesus would never let anything really terrible happen to us and the planet. I’ve slept SO much better knowing that. He turned out to be one of these quiverfull (Google it) types that wasn’t about to even consider that what he is doing is pig selfish and utterly irresponsible both personally and globally. He no doubt votes; I just walked away.
curtisls87 over 12 years ago
I don’t think citing the Alps is any different. That’s exactly my point. People on both sides of this issue use the same local weather argument. Your second point seems a bit harsh. I was just using the recent snow in the Alps as an example. I could have used the winter of 2010 in the Sierras, where snowpack exceeded 186% of base for the season, where snowfall lasted from October through May. The idea is the same. Neither side is helping their cause by citing local weather instances.