That is one of the predictions that has come true for climate change. Abnormal weather patterns over time. It supports that climate change has occured, it is indicative of it (in the large picture) and it most definitely doesn't disprove it. Areas that are normally hot cool, cool areas heat up, wet areas experience drought, dry areas experience rain, etc.

yeah......the sky is falling too!

How fortunate that it is now called "Climate Change" instead of "Global Warming". Its supporters can now claim to be correct regardless of which way the temperature goes on any given day. Brilliant -- brilliantly deceptive I mean.

It's a crock.

Don't fall off the edge of the earth! ;) :D

I love this article..yes, it's an OP-ED piece from the LA times, but with all the WSJ crap I see posted around here, fair is fair..

National Review magazine, with its popular website, is a perfect example. It has a blog dedicated to casting doubt on global warming, or solutions to global warming, or anybody who advocates a solution. Its title is "Planet Gore." The psychology at work here is pretty clear: Your average conservative may not know anything about climate science, but conservatives do know they hate Al Gore. So, hold up Gore as a hate figure and conservatives will let that dictate their thinking on the issue.



http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar...ion/op-chait25

Well you know what?
We are dying here in Texas.
Dying from the heat.
This summer has been excessively hot.
A much larger area is in severe drought than prior years.

So I will use this a solid evidence that the world as a whole is getting much hotter.

Good God.
How many times do we have to go through minature blips before people understand data taken over many years from may places? Not just Chicago...

Is this some Conservative affliction caused by a conservative virus...

[quote=GBBob]I love this article..yes, it's an OP-ED piece from the LA times, but with all the WSJ crap I see posted around here, fair is fair..

The psychology at work here is pretty clear: Your average conservative may not know anything about climate science, but conservatives do know they hate Al Gore. So, hold up Gore as a hate figure and conservatives will let that dictate their thinking on the issue.
[quote]

Conservatives already acknowledge the brilliance of Al Gore -- didn't he invent the internet? :rolleyes:

Your average liberal may very well know less about science than the conservatives do. They certainly use less logic in the formulation of their arguments.

Why dont we hear about hydroelectric power from conservatives
and how environmentalists tried shut down some of these dams?
They supply fully 20% of the electrical power for the US. These are
extraordinarily clean sources of energy. However, the dams
also affected the salmon run. And there was a solution. But you
get groups wanting to shut off most of the electrical power
to basically all of the Northwestern states? It was short-sighted and amazingly brazen with lack of thought.

So the conservatives use even worse arguments with "its cold in Chicago..."
Jeeezzzzzzz.

Just stick with the economics of cutting emissions.
Please.

Just because one can't understand a scientific subject, doesn't make it false.

Which party is constantly trying to get evolution out
of SCIENCE classrooms and creationism... no that wont work...
intelligent design... no thats stupid as sh.t...


into SCIENCE classrooms?

True, but just because one allegedly urgent theory can't be proven, doesn't mean it's assumed to be true either. The position that "the time for debate is over" does not hold.

A miniscule fluctuation in carbon dioxide is not going to doom the Earth. It's total nonsense.

Of course its a crock. they had to change it to climate change to skip over the fact that there has been global cooling for about 10 years. other contrary scientific opinions that don't support the narrative are also deep sixed. the fact is that relying on models as an accurate way to understand complex and subtle climatic behavior is assinine. the system is way too complex for the puny models they use with limited data.

they selectively pick and choose the science that will support their power grab. Like I've been saying, it doesn't matter to this bunch that the current bill will not reduce atmospheric CO2 levels. this is what liberals do, enact onerous feel good laws that they can boast about how they've really done something wonderful when in fact they will cause more harm than good.

the work that will shift to China and India where they will not be limiting CO2 output will in my opinion actually increase the rate that CO2 is churned out worldwide.

climate change is the new "it hasn't been proven that cigarettes cause cancer". that was a reasonably contentious debate until that day the roof fell in. funny how no one debates this anymore.

an interest group with deep pockets will fight a public health issue that damages their bottom line.

first they ignore you. next they laugh at you. then they fight you. then you win.

the g.o.p. is on a decades long losing streak of picking the wrong side of issues. i doubt anything beats chasing a culturally conservative family oriented hispanic vote into the democrats lap with racist immigrant bashing but 30 years from now this issue could prove me wrong.

this is just par for the loony far right course.

Here's a way to stop global warming......stop breathing , yeah that should be the next government policy , everyone just stop breathing.:D

Kind of like "jobs saved" people don't care.No one questions this administration. If you thought Bush was trying to control everything how can you possibly approve of what's going on now?

The stimulus plan was the first Obama disaster... and people are now calling them out on that.. cap and trade will be his second disaster... well maybe.. hope congress thinks enough about keeping their jobs and kills this bill.

your first paragraph ruined your second...

So you are also telling me that hurricane forecasting and weather forecasting is still just a guessing game, that it has not improved? You are selectively picking a 10 year period instead of looking at longer term. And that 10 year period you are selecting was actually predicted by some of the warming models.

It is very complex. But you are basically saying forget about it, we cant understand it, there is nothing going on basically because of your political leanings, not because you have looked at all the data. You choose the data that fits your agenda. Same thing for evolution, its too complex, we cannot understand it.
Typical for politicians.

Senior Democrat senators said on Wednesday they would change a provision that imposes carbon taxes on imports following warnings that the clause in the House’s cap-and-trade bill could spark a global trade war.

How fitting to tax the people they're supposed to represent and let foreign companies slide because they're afraid.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f91e0ff4-6...44feabdc0.html

Shocking.

Does anyone here actually believe in Cap and Trade and believe that it will work? Obviously most republicans or people that lean to the right do not, but does anyone actually think this is a good idea whether you believe in global warming or not? Is this really a solution? I would love to see an arguement for Cap and trade. All of the discussion has been on whether global warming exists or not, will someone please argue why they believe cap and trade is a good idea?