Tuesday, February 03, 2009

An Excellent Way Of Putting It

As for snowfall that could actually increase in the short term because of global warming. We have all heard the expression 'too cold to snow' and we have always expected precipitation to increase.

Although it is true you can't point to every blizzard and blame AGW. But this is a good, common-sense way of explaining things.


Anonymous said...

"The Copenhagen Climate Conference 2009, is likely to conclude on a strict regulatory regime on emissions for developed countries rather than for the developing countries, nobel laureate R K Pachauri said here today. "The negotiations are going on for the conference of parties at the Copenhagen where we will have a multilateral worldwide agreement, let's see what the implications of that would be," Pachauri, who is Chairman of UN's Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said on the sidelines of fifth convocation of DAIICT. "Of course, the developing countries will be exempted from any such restrictions but the developed countries will certainly have to cut down on emission," Pachauri said, adding, "some strict regulations are going to be there."

Ohhhh gawd, laughing too hard to type. Tooooooo funny.

Mike said...

You'd think people living in Canada would know that as winters warm up, we get more snow.

They seem to be as retarded as Fred.

Fred, google the phrase "non sequitor"...

Tom said...

How about when have record cold temperatures? Oh of course, that's subjective. The global alarmists are using Australia as proof of global warming (objective?) while ignoring England (Subjective).

Anonymous said...

There might be a curious short term benefit for some regions of Canada from this, particularly Southern Ontario. Most of our reservoirs depend on a very strong spring melt to top up reserves for the warmer months.

Not for a minute am I suggesting that we start pumping CO into the atmosphere if the above theory plays out true. For one thing it ignores that we still need rain in the summer, and if rainfall falls off, farm production is f*cked. But its part of the whole Climate Change thesis, stuff will change everywhere, some might actually benefit from it.

Just a thought, not a policy suggestion.

Mike said...


Climate change proponents have been pretty clear that the warming of the atmosphere will cause more extremes in weather, more wild weather and more violent weather, in both directions. Record cold and record hot, bigger hurricanes, more snow, less rain. You know, more extremes

It is hardly their fault that climate deniers don't understand a basic point and think warmer means better weather. You are the stupid ones not me.

As for policy, well, I side with Catelli...some areas will likely benefit. I'm not entirely sure that there is anything we can do, except for prepare to live in a radically different climate.

John Mashey said...

Warmer: yes, lower Canada may benefit some (most of hte Vermont maple business will come), but you'll also get more West Nile.

Likewise, you'll get kudzu, or so sayeth U of Toronto researchers in a nice presentation. They think that by 2015-2022, "the plant that ate the South" would survive in lower Ontario, and they show nice maps showing it's historical progress North.

Like the pine beetles eating their way through B.C., kudzu is killed by coldspells, which are less frequent and less deep these days.

Finally, as one last benefit of kudzu, like poison ivy and some other weeds, it is more than usually responsive to elevated CO2.

Frank said...

Even left-wingers now laughing at global-warming talk
Ventura County Star 2/3/2009 | Deroy Murdock

SAN FRANCISCO — So-called “global warming” has shrunk from problem to punch line. And now, leftists are laughing, too. It’s hard not to chuckle at the idea of Earth boiling in a carbon cauldron when the news won’t cooperate:

— Nearly four inches of snow blanketed the United Arab Emirates’ Jebel Jais region for just the second time in recorded history Jan. 24. The local dialect has no word for snowfall.

— Dutchmen on ice skates sped past windmills as canals in Holland froze in mid-January for the first time since 1997.

— January saw northern Minnesota’s temperatures plunge to 38 below zero, forcing ski-resort closures. A Frazee, Minn., dog-sled race was canceled, due to excessive snow. Days ago, ice glazed Florida’s citrus groves.

As Earth faces global cooling, both troglodyte right-wingers and lachrymose left-wingers find Al Gore’s simmering-planet hypothesis increasingly hilarious:

— “In terms of (global warming’s) capacity to cause the human species harm, I don’t think it makes it into the top 10,” Dr. Robert Giegengack, former chairman of University of Pennsylvania’s Earth and Environmental Sciences Department, told the Pennsylvania Gazette. Giegengack voted for Gore in 2000, and says he likely would again.

— Commentator Harold Ambler declared that he voted for Barack Obama “for a thousand times a thousand reasons.” He added that Gore “owes the world an apology for his actions regarding global warming.” He called Gore’s assertion that “the science is in” on this issue “the biggest whopper ever sold to the public in the history of mankind.”

— “Not only is it false that human activity has any significant effect on global warming or the weather in general, but for the record, global warming is over,” retired Navy meteorologist Dr. Martin Hertzberg wrote on carbon-sense.com.

The physical chemist and self-described “scientist and lifelong liberal Democrat” added: “The average temperature of Earth’s atmosphere has declined over the last 10 years. From the El NiƱo Year of 1998 until January 2007, it dropped a quarter of a degree Celsius. From January 2007 to the spring of 2008, it dropped a whopping three-quarters of a degree Celsius. Those data further prove that the fear-mongering hysteria about human-caused global warming is completely unjustified and is totally counterproductive to our nation’s essential needs and security.”

— “It is a tribute to the scientific ignorance of politicians and journalists that they keep regurgitating the nonsense about human-caused global warming,” left-wing commentator and columnist Alexander Cockburn wrote. “The greenhouse fear mongers rely on unverified, crudely oversimplified models to finger mankind’s sinful contribution — and carbon trafficking, just like the old indulgences, is powered by guilt, credulity, cynicism, and greed.”

Some leftists believe the collective hallucination of warmism distracts from what they consider urgent progressive priorities:

— “The most destructive force on the planet is power-driven financiers and profit-driven corporations and their cartels backed by military might,” University of Ottawa physics professor Dr. Denis Rancourt has written. “The global warming myth is a red herring that contributes to hiding this truth.”

— Geophysicist Dr. Claude Allegre, previously Education Minister in France’s late 1990s Socialist government, denounced the “prophets of doom of global warming.” He sounded amused in a 2006 L’Express article. “The ecology of helpless protesting has become a very lucrative business for some people.”

“The so-called ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is not holding up,” Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., told his colleagues Jan. 8. “It is becoming increasingly clear that skepticism about man-made global warming fear is not a partisan left versus right issue.”

So-called “global warming” has accomplished the impossible: It has united liberals and conservatives in laughter.

Anonymous said...

I second the motion.

All in favour?