The rest of the editorial is crap, mind you, but I like to give credit where credit is due.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Best One I've Heard
If climate change skeptics are "Deniers", which deftly conjures up the Holocaust and the class of people who would be willing to ignore historical fact to defend the Nazi regime, what do you call those who believe in the science behind AGW? "Warmers" makes them sound like a set of mittens, and "alarmists" is, lets face it, boring. The editorial in today's Investor's Business Daily provides the best answer I've heard to that question so far: their term is "Greenshirts", which also plays up the Nazi angle.
The rest of the editorial is crap, mind you, but I like to give credit where credit is due.
The rest of the editorial is crap, mind you, but I like to give credit where credit is due.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
http://www.coyoteblog.com/
coyote_blog/2007/07/
contributing-to.html
Sorry for breaking it up. Great proof on the causes behind raised temperatures.
Greenshirts, that's excellent. I thought WARMongers was good, but that is even better.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/
Lockwood_and_Frolich_Review.pdf
Are these guys geezers or hipsters? After all, that's all you need to know when discussing AGW, rather than read the report.
Whooee! As I recall readin' somewheres, there was already a greenshirt movement in the Merkan southland in the 50's and 60's. KKK types would wear green shirts so's they'd know their fellow bigots when they weren't sportin' the white hoods.
As a treehuggin' greenie, I ain't too keen on the greenshirt label an' I reckon they was tryin' to make some dumbass Nazi reference.
The rest of the editorial is crap, mind you....
No kidding. I don't know how you managed to get past the first paragraph:
Global Warming: A private firm's downgrade of its hurricane forecast raises an obvious question: If scientists can't get near-future projections in a limited area right, how can they predict the climate decades from now?...
Simple. The limited area will be more dramatically affected by less significant and thus largely unpredictable changes.
The Dumb-shirts are confusing weather and climate again...
The Greenshirts are warmongers . . . very simple.
Too bad they can't play hockey like me
Shaddup.
"As a treehuggin' greenie, I ain't too keen on the greenshirt label an' I reckon they was tryin' to make some dumbass Nazi reference."
Too bad. Man up, princess. What goes around, comes around.
"Man up, princess?"
Where do wingnuts learn to talk?
Are you 'offended' by being called a name which infers association with Nazis? Maybe call the HR board and complain.
"Global Warming: A private firm's downgrade of its hurricane forecast raises an obvious question: If scientists can't get near-future projections in a limited area right, how can they predict the climate decades from now?..."
I do believe this is due to La Nina which is a naturally occuring variation which affects WEATHER not long term climate.
Confusion based on ignorance yet again.
What you should worry about is global warming making these types of oscillations(el nino/la nina) permanent, then its the climate. One which is not predictable.
Jay -- you've done it again!
"I do believe this [reduction in hurricanes] is due to La Nina..."
Can't you keep anything straight? It's El Nino conditions in the Pacific that reduce Atlantic hurricane frequency, La Nina that increase it. Actually, neither is present this year.
When there is a small number (or low intensity) of hurricanes, it's just weather. But when there is a high number (or high intensity), you Greenshirts insist that it's climate!
You actually did get one thing right this time: "...then its the climate. One which is not predictable."
You've finally admitted it! Climate, like weather, is not really predictable. There's hope for you yet!
Post a Comment