I guess you didn't here the latest, It is actually the Evironmentalist Movement activities that accounts for almost all of the most recient "warming" (mid 80's and beyond)...*yelling into the dirt*

Teaturds drop out of the 6th grade and think they are smart.

Hey all you 'save the planet global warming freaks' who think we're the ones who live in a bubble:

#1. Where were you last year when much of the country saw record cold temperatures and record snow fall amounts?

#2. You say you care about the planet, yet apparently you think the US is the planet because Europe is seeing record cold temperatures THIS YEAR.

This is just the typical case of public bias. You are only going to support stories that validate your ideology while completely ignoring or dismissing or even disrespecting anything or anyone that offers a different viewpoint or set of facts that contradict you.

It is a primitive thought process and overwhelmingly juvenile. Come back when you've spent some time working on your thoughts.

LOL environmental movement activities?...like what?

and the 1000s of tons of CO2 (fossil fuels) we are unearthing and releasing into the atmosphere turning the earth into a greenhouse... nothing to do with it.... it all would of happened naturally anyway.... because nature give of CO2 also... Ice shelfs the size of new york city are not break off of the ice caps or anything...we don't need them to have cold weather...

Continue to be willful ignorance of scientific facts and measurements, and oppose all legislation that might get a handle on something before it becomes a problem.

I will boldly say that global warming is false and not stick my head down. The planet does this on its own. Anyone who claims it is global warming is just trying to grasp at straws to explain something that has happened millions of years in the past and will happen in the future no matter what.

vGlance, your the one in the bubble if you think record cold temperatures for a few days = no global warming / climate change.... its the very basis of extreme climate change theory

thanks for letting everyone know you misunderstand the entire concept.

11 Fact About Global Warming:

"

1. The primary greenhouse gas responsible for global warming is carbon dioxide. The U.S. is responsible for 19.91% of the carbon dioxide emissions worldwide.
2. Since 1990, yearly emissions of carbon dioxide have gone up by about 6 billion metric tons worldwide, which is more than a 20% increase. Almost all of that increase is due to human activities.
3. Carbon dioxide takes 100 years to disperse in the atmosphere. Even if emissions are stopped today, we will still feel the effects for years to come.
4. During the 20th century alone, the average surface temperature of the world has increased by 1.2 to 1.4°F.
5. 2000-2009 was the hottest decade on record, with eight of the hottest 10 years having occurred since 2000.
6. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment has concluded that in the past 50 years, the average temperatures of Alaska, eastern Russia and western Canada have increased as much as 7°F. This rise is almost twice the global average.
7. Extreme weather doesn't just mean high temperatures. Global warming is causing more intense rainfall and droughts at the same time across the world.
8. Sea levels have risen between 4-8 inches worldwide during the last century, and experts predict they could rise as much 2 feet in the next 100 years.
9. The World Health Organization blames 150,000 deaths per year on the effects of global warming including extreme weather, drought, heat waves, decreased food production and the increased spread of diseases like malaria.
10. At least 279 species of plants and animals are already responding to global warming, migrating north to escape rising temperatures.
11. Coral reefs are highly sensitive to small changes in water temperature. Scientists say if current CO2 emission trends continue, the world's coral reefs could be virtually destroyed by 2050."

http://www.dosomething.org/tipsandtools/11-facts-about-global-warming

Global warming.

It really depends on location. In our area, this year is still 4th warmest. I'd be willing to bet during the "dust bowl" in the 30's, everyone thought the sky was falling then. Turned the sky black and moved topsoil a thousand miles. It's not summer yet. Who knows what we may see again....... I would say don't hold your breath, but on second thought, you are exhaling carbon. LOL

Something in this article seems like it is trying to skew the info a bit. They state that March "shatters" the previous record and then further down the article a scientist actual talks about it breaking the previousrecord by 8.6 degrees - but this is false. It was 8.6 degrees higher than the 20th century AVERAGE. This is way different then being 8.6 degrees higher than the previous March record. The article doesn't ever state what the previous record was.

i know global warming is real... the snow outside is melting, it hasn't done that in MONTHS!

More importantly, my balls are sweating !!!!!!!!!!

Durn it, Eric thar you go with them gotcha fact thangs again. It's BS! The wurld is gitten hot becus the blacks are absorbin moor heet!

I know, I know, making fun of Fox "News" watchers is way to easy, but it has to be done.



http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/05/11036451-mixed-blessing-cleaning-up-pollutants-fueled-hurricanes-study-finds?lite

and thats how 'climate sheep' respond to people who may not believe what the other sheep believe, thanks calvalier for a great post

there is no such thing as man-made global climate change, its fake as obama. where im from the first 2 months were pretty hot but in march it rained most of the month and was pretty cold, now into april its still raining and its pretty cold. so what part of the US is this story talking bout, wait, what part of the world? its a power grab meant once again to divide the masses and force control on everyone in the name of 'global warming' or 'global cooling' or 'climate change' or whatever new term they come up with to fool you.

for the EPA to say what i exhale out my mouth is a pollutant is the most absurd thing to believe in since lock ness monster first appears.

p.s. eric, those are not in any way shape or form, facts.

there is no such thing as man-made global climate change

And tell me how many scientific journals have you been published in?

In fact, just show me your advanced degrees in meteorology, climatology, and / or astronomy and I'll be on my way.

NO MORE SNOW. This is good news. I hope the trend continues and next winter doesn't come at all.

I hope rising temperatures don't have anything to do with ....

Obama's rising debt ....

Gee, why would a right-winger want to change the subject on an article like this...?

i dont need a degree in anything, i use common sense. they use computer models to spew their BS, COMPUTER MODELS. do you know what computer models are? they are not accurate or scientific thats for sure. i can make a computer model show anything i want, after all they are programed by men and all the info the computer model receives is imputed by man, so how can i trust that program itself is coded right and that any processed info is complete. i know that they cherry pick data and that a lot of the data they have is incomplete and/or the span of time is too much.

i will say that our climate is very dynamic and we are in a unusual cycle of calm(starting after the last major ice-age), this is not the norm to this planet. we as a species only progressed this far due to this unusual calm in the destructive natural cycles this planets normally goes through. this calm will not last forever and there is no way to tell when it will end as we have barely an understanding of ourselves let-alone our planet.

i will not be lead to the pen because someone says i must go, i am a free-roam animal.

i dont need a degree in anything, i use common sense.

Wow! This just keeps getting better and better.

Yea, I don't need to understand science, I just use my common sense! GG

free roam animal LOL!

"...that makes a mind-boggling 40 states that had a March that was among their warmest on record.

It doesn't boggle so badly when you figure they all touch each other and that Europe, (outside of our center of the universe) froze it's ass off this year.

is that suppose to be your response to my post? where is the debate here? did you ever complete high school? do you even know what the scientific method is? these so-called scientist are not doing anything science related. they are cherry picking data and using incomplete data, then imputing it into a computer that computes it based on how it was programed, then spits out a model/chart of how that imputed data is suppose to show based on a human programmer. is that science?

when i see how they reach a conclusion, i can use common sense to tell me they are lying to me, its like pointing out a scam artist. just because you want to believe what someone else tells you is the truth does not mean what you were told to believe is true.

did you ever complete high school?

The better question is: did you? Or does 'common sense' substitute as a GED these days?

Sea levels should have risen 8' by now.

Incorrect ... only a small fraction of Greenland's ice cap has melted so far. The 40% less ice figure refers to minimum annual sea ice, which is important but doesn't contribute to sea level rise (since sea ice is already in the water, unlike land ice).

The United States no longer matters in the equation. It's China, and soon India that will control the emissions and whatever fallout happens as a result. Unfortunately, neither of those countries can afford to significantly alter their economies to have any meaningful impact on the problem. We should continue to improve technology to reduce emissions, etc. but it needs to be done over a period of time such that it has a manageable drag on GDP. Othewise, the last four years will seem like boom times by comparison. There is no easy solution and they all have significant costs.

And, at MireVO3 - you might want to consider refraining from commenting on science and technology issues if you can't form a coherent, grammatically acceptable sentance.

The USA still emits like 19% of the world's yearly CO2 output.

We matter.

I will boldly say that global warming is false and not stick my head down. The planet does this on its own. Anyone who claims it is global warming is just trying to grasp at straws to explain something that has happened millions of years in the past and will happen in the future no matter what.

Tonya1, if it is doing it on its own, then what do you call it? At this point, It doesn't matter how much we contributed to it since It is already too late for us to change. It is happening at an alarming rate and it is still a "die off" event.

What's wrong with climate change denial?

I mean, it makes absolute sense that we can continually pour billions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere without anything happening doesn't it? Not to mention all the other putrid stuff we emit.

Stop complaining, and buy some more gold.

Oh yes, and watch Fox.

"The better question is: did you? Or does 'common sense' substitute as a GED these days?"

so what you are saying ruken is that you dont need common sense to be educated? seems bought right for our current generation, of which i am not part of. if one does not have common sense then how does one know the difference between right and wrong? some things in life are pretty obvious to spot but i guess for someone like you, you need to be told what to believe in rather than finding out for yourself.

if you actually wanted to find the truth you would not respond in the matter that you do, your responses are more in-line with someone who does not question "authority figures".

Climate change is real...whether man made, man induced, or a natural event. To think otherwise is sheer ignorance. I have noticed as I have in the past that a lot of folks live in their small reality of the space they see. If its cold outside when the rest of the world is experiencing warmer temperatures they think the science is hogwash...it seems we have a bunch of ground hogs on this blog.

And just look at all of the money we saved by having a relatively warm winter (heating oil, snow removal, etc.). We may even squeeze in an extra growing crop for many food items.

Maybe there's a 'Silver Lining' to this global warming thing, and it's not all 'doom and gloom' after all.

In fact, if I remember my history correctly, the 'Medieval Warming Period' brought a TON of benefits to Europe over a period of about 400 years, and led to great strides in food production, overall health, social advancement and scientific achievement.

Here's an interesting 'read' on the topic;

http://news.investors.com/article/605815/201203271858/medieval-warming-period-is-no-myth.htm

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/05/11036451-mixed-blessing-cleaning-up-pollutants-fueled-hurricanes-study-finds?lite

clean air is causing global warming not CO2...what is so hard to understand it, it is right here in a peer reviewed study, presented to your eyes by MSNBC...If you don't buy it, then may MSNBC have mercy on your........what ever you have in place of a soul

Wonderful news! Warmth is life, cold is death. Think how many more people will live if winters are warmer. Every year many more people die from excessive cold than heat. Civilization today owes its very existence to the natural warming of the earth that ended the last ice age. Had that warming not occurred life would be very limited and much more primitive today. Embrace life and the warmth necessary to sustain it. Don't be duped into believing that a colder earth is desirable.

Here's an even better link that shows that the 'Medieval Warm Period' of about 800 years ago was much warmer than today FOR A PERIOD OF ABOUT 300 YEARS. Not only was it not a catastrophe, but it brought great benefits to mankind and saved millions of lives that would have been lost to cold and starvation;

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/the-medieval-warm-period-a-global-phenonmena-unprecedented-warming-or-unprecedented-data-manipulation/

PS - Don't tell Al Gore - It might ruin his next meal.

Eric-913730 "11 Fact About Global Warming: "The primary greenhouse gas responsible for global warming is carbon dioxide. The U.S. is responsible for 19.91% of the carbon dioxide emissions worldwide."

False - The biggest 'greenhouse gas' is water vapor, which is far more responsible for 'global warming' than carbon dioxide. Here's a link that says that 95% of the 'greenhouse effect' comes from water vapor;

http://www.skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas.htm

PS - If the U.S. is responsible for 20% of carbon emissions, then China is responsible for about 25% - perhaps you should try to convince the Chinese to stop building a dirty coal fired electric plant about once per week. I wouldn't hold my breath though, because they love that cheap energy that helps them steal jobs from the U.S., and Obama is helping them along by effectively regulating coal fired plants in the U.S. out of existence.

I am a scientist and the raw data does not support all the fear mongering. Yes, it's getting warmer. Yes, it's likely man has at least some effect. Yes it would get warmer anyway, just not as fast. No, the seas will not rise 30 feet in our lifetimes, or three feet, or 0.3 feet for decades.

Yes, all those old climate models that sourced all the fear mongering are wrong, they greatly overestimated the effect of CO2. Yes, this has been admitted. Yes, the IPCC is a bunch of political hacks posing as scientists, their publicly stated agenda is wealth transfer from the rich countries to the poor, global socialism.

Yes the trend will accelerate or yes it will decelerate depending on which camp you are part of, (not even alarmists are in agreement on what happens next.

No, the US has absolutely no control over global warming, China, India, etc. do. Yes, we will bankrupt the country if we go along with enviro-nazi proscribed limits.

Exxon is no longer the largest oil company, PetroChina is. We are no longer the biggest producer of carbon, again China is and soon India will surpass us. We are on the right track, our carbon output is declining, it's the developing world that needs to shape up and they refuse.

Yes the government is doing everything it needs to do, it is now up to the individual to do more. The government has given you a 30% tax credit for solar panels and $7500 for battery cars. With 80% of carbon coming from individuals, (40% housing, 40% transportation), it is up to you to take the next step.

You want the government to do something? They already have, now it's your turn. You can tell how seriously liberals take climate change by how many solar panels they have on their roof and if they have a Leaf or Ford Focus Electric in their driveway. If you have neither, then STFU hypocrites.

Note: I am not panicking, yet I have 10KW solar because thanks to China they are finally viable. My payback is less than eight years.

The Earth has cycles of weather and has since it was formed. We have experienced multiple Ice Ages, and multiple periods of warming. There are many factors to all of it the main one being the sun and its periods of increased activity and solar storms it creates. Is the earth warming? Parts of it are, while parts are cooling. although there are glaciers melting in areas, there are also those that are expanding. is the earth reaching temperatures warmer then ever before ? NO!!! this past summer was the warmestg in Russia since 1500, ( another great msnbc article for you greenies) that means that it has taken 600 years to get back to the same levels they used to experience. Europe experienced the 'Little Ice Age" around 1650, this led to famine from crop failures as well as the onset of the PLAGUE due to lack of food. We are now just returning to temperatures they experienced before the event. Antartica was not always covered by ice, actually had at least grasslands we have found through core samples penetraiting the ice flow, so nope not warmer there yet either. Although we have been having some record temperatures broken we still have many on the books from befre the 1920's so we have had these temperatures before around the US also. we have only been keeping semi acurate temperature data since the late 1800's many things affect the temperature as well in some of these area's. the amunt of pavement and buildings vs the amount of grass and open land area's has an affect on localized temperatures also as concrete increases the heat levels. And while we have had some increase in temperatures here in the US there are also other area's of the world that is haveing record cold weather.

If you are truely worried we are experiencing a extinction event you can do your part to help prevent this, all greenies, hold your breath long enough, you will help reduce CO2 emissions, reduce the amount of oil you WOULD have consumed, and help prevent overpoulation and the shortage of food before that becomes you next big thing to preach on

Umm it is not called global warming, it is called climate change. Yup it happens naturally, but anyone who thinks 7 BILLION humans have nothing to do with it is either severely undereducated, or trolling just to hear their own hot air. While humans may not be the biggest reason, our continued abuse of the planet will, in time, have consequences.

Any action has an opposite and equal reaction

Oh right, I forgot, some folks do not believe in science. Or reality. Or common sense.

We should as an intelligent species strive to do what we can to preserve what we have. Can we save it from everything? Nope. But it should not mean we do nothing and continue to live in ignorance. So you do not think it will affect you... well it will affect your descendants. "For the betterment of myself" over "better for the species". I wonder how that would have worked out if 10,000 years ago people would have stopped procreating because it was difficult to raise a family in Neanderthal times. Yup, none of us would be here.

Just something to think about...

There are millions of reasons to protect and preserve our planet and environment, But this Global Warming/ClimateChange/What ever the Next title of the Lie is, has been nothing but a bald faced lie that every thinking human being has seen right through since the phrase was coined...piss into the wind all you want, just don't try to convince me that it is raining

I would never try and convince you of anything Phea, I do not enjoy beating my head against rock walls. You can live in your delusional world (where everyone who doesn't believe in your political view is an idiot) and I will simply live in reality. I do not care what people say, I believe what I see. Life, and travel are what form my beliefs, not some full of hot air windbag on a TV screen. Keep sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "LALALALALA" and everything will get better. Just not for you.

@ Paul

I apologize if you implied I was questioning your intelligence, because I wasn't...it is the integrity, of those who have been passing this tripe as Science...A great con-man is not a stupid man, they are most definitely the most intelligent among us...but the first lesson a successful con-man should learn is not to underestimate their mark

It's fitting. As the GOPiggies turn us into a Banana Republic, rising temperatures bring an an influx of tropical pests.

Some things to ponder --

The northern hemisphere is experiencing both record warming and cooling events. If this was a random phenomena - why would there be record events at both temperature extremes?

Animal migration is changing, too. Subtropical species are extending their range to the north. Bird and butterfly migration patterns are slowly changing. Are animal species learning politics?

Burning fossil fuels does not only release carbon dioxide. Most fossil fuels are mixtures of carbon and hydrogen - so burning fossil fuels will release both carbon dioxide and water. Burning fossil fuels also consumes oxygen. Every ton of carbon dioxide released to the atmosphere means that about 1/2 ton of water has also been generated and about 1 ton of oxygen has been consumed.

RP, climate does change naturally... Over the course of hundreds of thousands of years. The only natural way for things to change this rapidly is through some cataclysmic event like a supervolcano or meteor impact.

Or the sun, which scientists say cannot account for the recent (past 30 year) warming trend.

That, and the sun is cooling...

Lol, I love this new tea bagger talking point. Now that climate change can't be reasonably denied, the new mantra is "Of course the climate is changing, but aberrant weather is perfectly normal".

Random did you miss the part in the article where even NOAA analysts (who tend to be among the most conservative climate scientists) stated that up to 10% of the severity of this heat wave could be attributed to man?

That, and the sun is cooling...

Is it?

I thought I read that it was steady or increased slightly, but only enough to cover <10% of the warming trend.

Joe - What it actually said was:

....greenhouse gases "likely contributed on the order of 5% to 10% of the magnitude of the heat wave during 12-23 March."...

If you would like to believe that man contributes 100% of the greenhouse gas effects, feel free to do so and please reduce your carbon footprint to zero..

Brian, swing and a miss. Where did I say that I thought all of it was man made? I happen to agree with the 10% figure.

Joe - this is your statement @#2.4...

...stated that up to 10% of the severity of this heat wave could be attributed to man?

You obviously misinterpreted what was written in the article.

Can I buy some pot off you? Severity = magnitude of heat. Shouldn't you be outside yelling at gay people instead of indoors failing at reading comprehension?

And if it's the generalized term "greenhouse gas" that's giving you problems, I suggest reading the actual report which specifies it as man made.

That's right, Climate Change is ENTIRELY natural, there's not a DANG thing we can do about it, so we shouldn't even try! Eat, drink, be merry, and 'drill, baby, drill!' so a chosen few will be able to lead a profligate lifestyle as we get in line behind the dinosaurs. Only Liberal Kooks think we might actually make the world a better place by changing lifestyles; it's Survival of the Richest! /s

http://www.dosomething.org/tipsandtools/11-facts-about-global-warming

There is plenty of evidence of global warming. We don't need to bankrupt our economy trying to fix it, but we need to do what we can.

A little wind power, a little solar panel makes a difference in the long run.

Since global warming was proven to be flawed, they changed it to climate change.

I think you need a little factcheck.org son.

there is no evidence that man is causing any abnormal climate change, none. if by any stretch of the imagination we are creating problems- is the US the only county on the planet now? so are we to expect every country to abide by some rules set by some global panel? why do people believe this BS? cause some scientists said so? cause the government said so? cause you think you know everything? you do know the the fake global warming science uses computer models right? computer models are only as accurate as the are programed to be, so they are programed with a bias towards predicting gloom and doom. they cherry pick all their data and leave out extenuating circumstances like the sun and moon or local events like volcanoes or earthquakes.

1 volcano eruption puts out more crap than all the humans combined in our entire existence, matter of fact the last mini ice-age was caused by a volcano as well as all previous ice-ages were caused by mega-events, not humans.

we will never advance our species if we keep being sheep to people who's main goal is to gain power at any cost.

there is no evidence that man is causing any abnormal climate change, none.

Wow. Just...wow.

Go on any NOAA, NASA, or the website of just about any industrialized nation's meteorological / climatology agency. You will be enlightened.

But I won't hold my breath. We both know you won't.

Really ?... I'm planning on opening up one of them poor countries so I can get some of the ca$h from the wealthier countries.... Maybe a nice island in the Carribean. They are always under a threat from rising waters due to global warming sudden climate change.

Maybe we can use the money to make a giant ice machine which will cool the waters, or at least cool our drinks.

Maybe we can use the money to make a giant ice machine which will cool the waters, or at least cool our drinks.

We'll just take a page from Futurama and have all the robots fart to move the Earth further from the Sun.

yeah let me go to government run websites to get the right info, lol all to funny. so because the government says its true then it must be true? i have looked at how the gather and input their data and all i can is they are lying. why dont you look at how they collect their data and how they input it into a man-made computer generated model. they do not abide by the scientific principles when dealing with 'climate change', they go by what the computer says.

yeah let me go to government run websites to get the right info, lol all to funny.

I'm really happy I bought those tin foil futures.

they go by what the computer says.

Computer models (including both weather and climate models) are programmed with detailed experimental data about the thermal properties of greenhouse gases, and then extensively verified. It can't be dismissed that easily.

computers models are not part of the scientific method, they are not verifiable to be even remotely accurate as it is impossible to make that assumption based on inaccurate data(or accurate). if you want to believe what a computer says then by all means lower yourself to sloppy standards. let me ask you something, can the scientist test what he is trying to prove?

tin foil hats? is that your retort? so you must trust everything the government tells you right? nice! sorry to burst you bubble but the government from top to bottom has been caught countless times lying, cheating, stealing, bribing, corrupting, etc from the start and you want to believe that man is causing some global warming BS and that the only way to fix it is spend trillions of dollars and control peoples choices, all while other countries could care less.

you want global oppression under the guise of "climate change".

Their computer models greatly overstated the effects of CO2. This has been admitted. The co chair of the IPCC has publicly stated the agenda of CC is wealth transfer from rich nations to poor nations.

Again, the US has zero control over CC, period. We could shut down every coal fired plant tomorrow and China will have replaced them all in a matter of months, they are bringing two on line a week and will do so for the next three decades.

From an environmentalist's own mouth "If China gets on board pretty much nothing we do will matter, if China doesn't get on board pretty much nothing we do will matter".

CC will actually have a net positive effect on the US. So why should we bankrupt ourselves, send millions of jobs overseas, and lower our standard of living when we are the solution and the third world is the problem?

Oh yes, they can. Sea level has risen world wide by 4-8 inches during the last century. So the oceans aren't getting cooler the ice is melting.

Anyone else here aware of the jet vapor trails and pollution factor in this? The fact that pollution and vapor trails may be actually saving us from a great deal of the impact from co2 driven global warming? This might be a huge concern and we may need to re-think how we go about cleaning up the air. Read some of this then do a Google search for more info. Warming might be far, far worse than we realize yet simply because our own pollution is tempering it.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3310_sun.html

Really?-

Climate change cannot be looked at as a one year to the next issue. That's more a study in weather trends than climate. Climate change is studied in decades and centuries. The tracing of ocean temps has only had about 7 years of data to study and nothing definitive to compare that data to. Until a benchmark can be established, no real interpretations can be made.

And the profits that the oil companies are making and declaring is minus the significant tax subsidies they receive from the government, aka us tax payers. I can give or take buying anything Apple and I never have purchased much jewelery, but I like most people in this country, must buy gas to get around and contribute to the economy. Huge difference.

"The tropical Atlantic has anomalously cooled over the past several months, and it appears that the chances of an El Niño event this summer and fall are relatively high."

Definition of Anomaly-
Deviation or departure from the NORMAL ORDER, form, or rule.

Funny you should say that the oil companies are treated as all other companies in this country when there have been recent battles in the House and Senate regarding the elimination of subsidies given to the oil companies that other corporations do not receive. The side that has worked the hardest to defend these subsidies is the Republican side.

This show a list of 9 subsidies given to oil companies that are not extended to other corporations.-

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/05/oil_company_subsidies.html

As a liberal I would not expect you to know that, economics not being your strong suit.

So by the stereotypical logic, that would mean science wouldn't be yours.

Too bad we're in a science-based discussion. Must make you feel uncomfortable.

The reason scientists call it climate change instead of global warming is to deal with the idiots who simply cannot understand that as the average planet temperatures rise (as they have), that causes changes in the jet stream and the ocean currents which displaces cold air and water from the polar regions resulting in cases where the climate is experiencing colder temperatures and others are seeing erratic swings in temperature for the norms. So. yes some areas are getting colder, drier, wetter, whatever, but the one constant is the unprecedented rise in the overall average temperature of the planet.

Is this a normal cyclic change? Not from the overwhelming evidence of core samples and multiple other measurements of past climates. There have definitely been some wild swings between hot and ice ages, but they took thousands of years to happen and what we've seen in the last decades are unprecedented unless you're thinking of a natural cyclic event like a huge meteor striking the earth and blacking out the sun for a few years.

Those who politicize the data, as you did.

Pot, meet kettle.

Or those who try to come across as scientists themselves.

Well we know you clearly don't qualify there.

In every instance, the solution for climate change is ALWAYS an exchange of cash from "rich" to "poor" countries. Why?

Solutions? You cannot even comprehend the problem correctly, and you're talking solutions?

How do the scientists explain the current cooling of the oceans?

Problem is, the oceans aren't cooling (on global average). 2011 was the warmest year ever for global ocean heat content between depths of 0 and 2000 meters (the greatest depth that can currently be measured reliably); go look it up on the NOAA/NODC websites.

So the site is what you have a problem with? This was just the quickest way to get there. Did you read the list or just stop when you saw the word "Progressive"?

Are you in any position to refute the information? Those subsidies listed are, in fact, factual. Your feelings about the source of those facts are, well, feelings.

I do not doubt Fox if they are presenting provable facts, it's just not that often that they do.

If the actual cost of oil and gas instead of the price for gas were honestly given, we as a country already pay more than $7.00 a gallon.

Your continued reference to what you perceive to be my understanding of economics is becoming a bit tedious.

Not to worry, there will always be someone like you around to tell me all the doom and gloom stories you can conceive of.

No answer to my queries ie: money?

That's ok, I NEVER get an answer to that one.

Money is usually at the root of fraud. This really is no different.

From Al Gore's "Carbon Credit Exchange" to just out and out transfers of wealth, the whole thing is a moneymaker for some. How much are you getting? LOL

Way to start showing your true colors. Keep posting your mindless rhetoric!

Your continued reference to what you perceive to be my understanding of economics is becoming a bit tedious.

Don't waste time trying to reason with him Terry. It's impossible to defeat trolls with reason. They just don't understand it.

Really? You should know that it was Frank Luntz that came up with the term "Climate Change" when Bush was President because the said that "Global Warming" sounded too ominous.

No one has talked about the transfer of money, except you wing nuts.

but the transfer happens right? saying its meaningless does not make it less meaning. really? poses a simple question but all you people seem to respond with is typical sheep sounds. why is there anything called carbon credits? carbon credits take money away from the rich and gives it to the government who in-turn gives it to who they want to control, it does nothing to address any problem and only serves as a revenue source for the government and its puppets.

siting a blog as a reliable source is nothing less than laughable.

Special tax deductions, preferences, and credits will cost the government about $45 billion over the next 10 years if not ended.

Compared to 770 million.

Who's transferring money again?

Swagganaut,

You need to ask the following people. They have all supported "Cap and Trade" policies before they were against them. In case you need help "Cap and Trade" is how carbon credits are managed.

Former President G. H. W. Bush (R)

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)

Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.)

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.)

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)

Half term Governor Sarah Palin (R. outerspace)

Really,

I do drive when needed and I drive a car that gets about 32 miles per gallon. I am hardly "ardently opposed to oil". I also have invested in a PV solar array that provides more than enough power for my house. In fact, so much I get a check from our local electric supplier every month for the excess.

What have you done lately and what exactly are you so badly trying to defend?

From this post you have finally openly said that you don't care about the environment, just money. You could have saved a lot of time and just said that at the beginning.

Fossil fuels—coal, petroleum (oil), and natural gas — are concentrated organic compounds found in the Earth's crust. They are created from the remains of plants and animals that lived millions of years ago in the form of concentrated biomass. According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), fossil fuels account for 84 percent of U.S. energy demand.

Burnt fuels are the problem. If you don't think so, spend the day breathing the exhaust for that 40 mpg car you drive.

So how many solar panels do you have on YOUR roof? Do you own a leaf? Saying you use less oil is like saying you are less pregnant, either you are or you aren't. If you want government to shut down companies and force them to China, they will do it. If you want to have them tax you to death they will do it.

Either way you will pay so I ask again, how many solar panels are on your roof? Either you care about the environment or you care about furthering the socialist agenda of wealth transfer, which is it?

I have 24 panels on my roof, enough to supply all of my needs and excess that is fed back into the grid for sale by the power company, as if that is any of your business. This excess is energy that does not require the burning of fossil fuel in any of its forms.

I have never said that we should immediately quit using fossil fuels but we do need to find new and better ways to keep this country and, by extension, the world moving forward. Why can't you folks find something between all and nothing?

I am still wondering what, besides the one you could best cover with a hat, is your point?

I'll ask you, how many solar panels are on your roof? Do you own a leaf? Or do you just want to spend other peoples money like most liberals.

Predicted what? The political institutionailazion of anti-scientific thought?

Ya, that too

I think Notre Dameous predicted football season starting early.

Nostrodamus on the other hand.

I think Notre Dameous predicted football season starting early.

Yeah, what a shame about that hunchback.

(what hump?)

It is not the science that is wrong, it is the fear mongering conclusions that are bogus. A number of noted scientists backed me up with an op ed in the WSJ, their conclusion? If fear mongering is associated with CC, follow the money.

You are correct.

In this case Europe had an extremely cold winter, so that goes to balance it out globally. The reason continental US had a very warm spring was because of the jet stream parking itself in Canada.

Now, was this jet stream thing caused by AGW, or just a freak event? Who can know?

Brian, with global climate change the entire planet may not get warmer quickly. What happens are weather patterns change. The Sahara Desert used to be green, furtile with flowing water but the weather patterns changed due to climate change and turned it into a desert.

If things keep up Texas is destined to become a desert like the Sahara. They have had record droughts for years now and each year it gets worse. The rain they have had this year doesn't even make a dent in what they need. It's like dropping water on a hot skillet.

One of the great fears from the melting icecaps is that the North Atlantic currents will shut down and Europe will go into an ice age. Most of Europe gets its heat from these currents.

If things keep up Texas is destined to become a desert like the Sahara. They have had record droughts for years now and each year it gets worse. The rain they have had this year doesn't even make a dent in what they need. It's like dropping water on a hot skillet.

Seems kind of just when you think they tend to be the ones leading not only the oil production but the 'head in the sand' effort.

If I were religious I'd say god was against them... but I'm not so I don't.

Sandy...
All the lakes in my area (North Texas) are back up to normal or above.

mj...
Be glad for the oil production, everything we use has petroleum attached to it one way or another. Or, I guess you could show us all how we're supposed to live. Move into a cave and stop using anything associated with oil...lead the way, sir. Oh, and God still loves you.

Ruken, that is not true about Europe having an extremely cold winter. Europe basically had an unusual warm and dry first half of winter, but when the Jet Stream "flipped" as mentioned in this article, they had record cold temps and record levels of snowfall.

Or quite possibly this year's warm winds are the result of God having to constantly yawn from the boredom suffered by watching the occupy silliness.

Heh, and which scientific program did you get your doctorate in, Howdy?

You can extrapolate near the average temperature of a place millions of years ago with fossils and the types of organisms they were.

You can also extrapolate the approximate composition of the atmosphere due to sedimentary rock.

Ruken,

You're trying to explain science to people that think the earth is only 7000 years old and man rode dinosaurs.

You're trying to explain science to people that think the earth is only 7000 years old and man rode dinosaurs.

I know. I don't really know what I try anymore. They won't get it.

Extrapolations are nothing more than semi-educated guesses. They could be close, or they could be way off.

I don't know how old the earth is, and oddly enough, neither does anyone else. They guess it is a certain age, but they don't know and they have no way of knowing.

Thank you for proving my point. Just because you don't understand the science, you think it's wrong. Guess what? Pretty much everything in the universe can be "dis-proven" if all you need is a margin of error.

You: When did the universe form?

Me: Well it was ~13B years ago.

You: Wrong! You can't give me the exact year so it's all wrong.

Just because scientists are hesitant to use the word 'exact' (they won't even tell you the 'exact' composition of our atmosphere at times) you think they have no idea.

You are a clear example of what is wrong with our educational system. Skeptics with clear scientific basis and comprehension of the variables at hand are welcome. You are just a mindless drone regurgitating rhetoric from some mindless skeptic site. It's clear you have no comprehension of climatology or meteorology in the slightest, therefore it would be best for your mental health just to stop thinking about it and leave the science to more qualified minds.

" Flintstones, meet the Flintstones" la de la de daaa.

You are a typical Climate Change enthusiast, quick to place blame, quick to insult, but lacking any real facts to prove anything.

And you're a typical climate change denier: unversed in any scientific knowledge whatsoever.

See? I can play this game too.

P.S.: You want facts? http://climate.nasa.gov/

Start there; if you can comprehend what they're even saying.

The question of how old the earth (and the universe) really is was answered by some musicians several years ago, in response to a vital need for a theme song:

Our whole universe was in a hot dense state,
Then nearly fourteen billion years ago expansion started. Wait...
The Earth began to cool,
The autotrophs began to drool,
Neanderthals developed tools,
We built a wall (we built the pyramids),
Math, science, history, unraveling the mysteries,
That all started with the big bang!

Bare Naked Ladies.

In 200 years, if this planet bursts into flames, none of us will be here.

Another difference between your kind and mine.

My kind can actually think about long term consequences and their effect on our posterity.

Oh, I can think about it. But I cannot do anything about it.

Neither can you.

Another mentality of your kind: "It's too hard so let's not try."

Try all you like. No one is stopping you. I have more pressing issues....like these steaks.

That's not surprising. That's about how forward thinking you are.

Really? You are full of crap. You have not looked into Solar. Because the pay off is about 5 years, not 20. No power, no matter how it was created can be stored. and it can damn sure be put into the Grid, or do you you think all the wind farms are just supplying power to a private individual.?

As someone who HAS done solar you are both right and both wrong! :<) Solar IS viable if and only if you DIY the installation, (it's actually pretty easy if you know electricity). It is NOT viable if you have a contractor do it, (they rip you off and keep the profit for themselves). This is only true thanks to China which has turned solar into a commodity.

Five year payback is probably for a DIY install with a very agressive state program. My 10KW system cost $22,600. With federal and state subsidies as well as net metering my payback will be less than eight years and that's with 6.5 cent/KWH electric rates. Since I bought, panels have come down 30% more, I paid $1.44/watt, they are now $1/watt or less. If I bought today payback would be less than seven years.

Really,

If you would like to go solar, here are two great sites:

http://www.sunelec.com/ Use them for panels and inverter.

http://solarelectricdistributor.com/ Use them for mounting racks, USE2 wire, etc.

Home Depot can take care of the run of the mill stuff. If You don't know electricity, find someone on the block who does. I live a stones throw from Canada and if it works up here it will definitely blaze down there. Good luck.

raddave,

I am one who doesn't buy the fear mongering and I have solar, Really doesn't buy in, yet he has looked into it and perhaps my info will get him to go ahead. The question is, you DO buy in so how much solar do YOU have? Do you own a Leaf?

If so, good on you. You are an Ed Begley. If not you are a hypocrite like Al Gore. (That's how I divide envoro's, those that walk the walk, and those that just talk the talk.)

XDm9mm, read the article again. The 15,000+ records broken were NOT AVERAGES. They were actual high temps for specific days. The overall average they are talking about is all of them combined and then compared to past years.

Man, I wish people read and actually understand the articles instead of stopping when they hit something they don't like or understand. :p

Sandy,

So, WHERE in the article did you find that it was 79.9 degrees last year and 80.0 degrees this year? (YES the numbers are for the purpose of example only.) And were these "records" being broken on an hour by hour basis in a particular area for the purpose of exaggerating an issue?

I read the 8.6 degrees above average, but as I noted AVERAGES can be deceiving.

I realize they're making all attempts possible at inciting people to react to the "news", but what is the real news?

Show the real numbers and not averages. Averages can be deceiving.

I've got a real number for you--my heating bill for the last month is less than half of what it normally is.

It's right there if you actually look. The video shows using red dots where records were broken for every single day and every single night during March. If you watch the indicator in the lower left you will see it marching through the dates for day and then night. That is why the red dots change. Those are daily records broken during the daytime and nighttime.

That is why I said I wished people would actually read the articles because the information is usually there but overlooked by someone in a hurry to post their views.

Sandy - The information I couldn't find in the article, or anywhere else was how many weather stations were used to generate these temperatures

Not necessarily. Depends on whether you use the mean, median or mode average. It could still be zero using mode.

How many doesn't matter. If you want to stop the video and count all of the red dots that are reporting stations then feel free to waste your time. The video tells the tale.

Then again, according to Climate Change enthusiasts, the climate and weather are two different things and one has nothing to do with the other.

I could make a blanket argument about AGW deniers and say they all think it's just "natural" warming, even though scientists have yet to find another source outside of human activity.

In other words AGW deniers think it isn't man, but have yet to provide a source as to what it is, when all that's left on the table is man.

It could be man, it could be natural.

Scientists are divided over it, even though Climate Change enthusiasts will deny that.

No they aren't. 97% of qualified scientists concur that it is man-made.

Keep talking please, I just bought tin foil futures and you're doing wonders for the price.

Whatever the number is, they have locked themselves into a position and they have to provide results. Eventually another hacker will get into their email accounts and the lid will once again be thrown off and we will see the charade for what it really is.

You know that 'Climate-gate' was proven false right? I know, this might come as a shocker to you.

You need factcheck.org desperately, because you aren't helping your case throwing disproven RWNJ myths around here.

4 out of 5 doctors once agreed that smoking was a digestive aid and recommended Camel, Kool, Marlboro and various other brands.

Ah yes, the infamous straw-man argument. Are logical fallacies are you can conjure up?

Climate-gate is and was real. Criminal investigations were initiated by the "victims."

Prove it then.

Factcheck.org, snopes.com are left leaning "progressive" sites.

Not exactly unbiased information there.

You really love that tin-foil hat don't you? Whenever someone contradicts your mantra, they must be part of the liberal conspiracy.

Averages can be deceiving.

True, but when it comes to thermal energy, global average oceanic and atmospheric temperatures are a reliable measure of the Earth's overall heat balance, and both are increasing. As I noted above, NOAA/NODC data show 2011 as the highest global ocean heat content since the measurements began. And 2011 air temperatures were the warmest ever (globally) for a La Nina year.

Really?, as I stated above, Europe did not have a record cold winter. Europe's winter was really broken into two seasons. The first half was unseasonably warm, and zero snow. Second half was record cold temps and record snow falls. I have not seen what the average is for the winter there yet.

And I love how you wing nuts love to call factcheck and snopes "left leaning" because they don't support your world views. But, they do back up their assertions with supporting documentation.

Factcheck.org and snopes both receive funding from Soros, they are both left leaning. This isn't exactly breaking news.

When I graduated and went to work at a world renowned research facility I was also naive that scientists were above it all. Then, a few years in, I sat in a meeting and watched a PhD sell his soul to protect his job. What he was saying was absolutely absurd, yet he would not back off.

Scientists are human, they have an agenda. I good scientist is willing to admit it and try to negate it, political hacks do whatever is expedient to save their own skins.

Climate gate proved beyond doubt the IPCC are a bunch of political hacks, period. It was not debunked one iota, what they were doing was despicable from a scientific point of view.

Again, I do believe the earth is warming, I believe we are likely having SOME effect. Yet every time I look at what raw data I can find, it does NOT support the fear mongering! It's the fear mongering that is all about the money. As Really said, why does CC always revolve around taking your money and giving it to someone else?

Gore was really pushing crap and tax because he was heavily invested in the Chicago carbon exchange. Once it was defeated, he bailed. The fear mongering is all about the money.

Chris...

Not to pat myself on the back, but my weather predictions several years ago were actually better than the forecasters.

I'd flip a coin and about 75% of the time, I predicted the next days weather.

Seriously, thank you for a well thought out and expressed post.

And I agree: Life IS always very interesting if you pay attention. It's even better when one has the concept of original thought and does not follow the sheeple over the cliff.

Chris

Your comment is of course completely ridiculous. Were it true we would still be out hunting antelope to survive. Agriculture would never have arrived because there would have been no way to predict what the climate would be from day to day, hence no way to plant and harvest.

let's understand over most of the contiguous US we have had temperatures well above average-not a degree or two, but multiples of 10 degrees higher than normal. 90 in the midwest in mid March. And not a freak day but weeks of it. Record cold and snow in Europe last year going on for weeks while people who have lived in a certain CLIMATE for hundreds of years froze to death because it wasn't normal to their hundreds of years of history in that area.

You cannot predict the weather with a linear model but this is climate. You can absolutely predict climate with a linear model.

I'm glad your data were published, but where?!

mj... I predict the global climate WILL change... as it has numerous times in millenias past and it will again in millenias future.

I looked at the charts about glacial and inter-glacial periods and they happen. And they've happened even when we didn't have SUV's.

So mj, what you're saying is that mideval man didn't have agriculture because they had no way to predict what the climate would be? Interesting. LMAO.... some of the things you people come up with in your own little minds!

Yes, weather is highly "non linear" and chaotic, however the overall heat content of the Earth's oceans and atmosphere responds in an approximately linear way to "forcing" such as solar variation, aerosols and greenhouse gases. This is easily explained by the "conservation of energy" (energy is neither created nor destroyed) principle in physics.

Then we all die and man-made global warming is no longer a problem.

Sure, dream on friend, this is only one small piece of the picture. Look at sea surface temperatures, the recession of most alpine glaciers, shifting precipitation patterns with associated desert expansions -- there's a broader driver here than simple statistical flux. Thanks.

Correlation does not imply causation.

You actually think that's profound? A child could understand the greenhouse effect. Even I almost understand it.

Doug - If we really understood the greenhouse effect in more than theory then they could actually make accurate predictions of the future AND the past with their models...they can't. The planet is getting warmer because we have been coming out of a multi-century little ice age now for only about 150 years (give or take a few decades). If you buy that the climate before the industrial revolution was "normal" then that would mean the little ice age is what our climate is supposed to be like all the time. Odd that I don't hear anyone making that claim.

JJ, nevertheless, CO2 trapping heat is a plausible cause for the correlation between our burning of fossil fuel and the warming. Perhaps 'correlation does not imply causation,' but logic infers causation.

Doug - An inference? Come on now. Look, if you believe man spewing CO2 into the atmosphere because of industrialization is the cause of warming then you're saying that the climate before the Industrial revolution was normal...that would be the Little ice Age. And remember, that lasted several hundreds of years and it was a major change from the previous climate that happened in a VERY short period of time (i.e. a hundred years or less). These relatively recent changes (i.e. over the course of say 2,000 years) would logically "infer" that warming like this occurs naturally and so does cooling.

that would be the Little ice Age. And remember, that lasted several hundreds of years and it was a major change from the previous climate that happened in a VERY short period of time (i.e. a hundred years or less). These relatively recent changes (i.e. over the course of say 2,000 years) would logically "infer" that warming like this occurs naturally and so does cooling.

Which NASA scientists have attributed to the sun.

However with all of our satellites and astronomy devices these days, we cannot pin more than 10% of the current warming trend on the sun.

Ruken - So? That would be called "natural" would it not? My points remain. What is the "normal" climate all you man made global warming people are shooting for? What is this steady state you think exists that we have unbalanced? I keep hearing things like "this warming is happening faster than ever in history" and yet the little ice age cooled even quicker. You say, "oh that was the sun"...so what? It is an example of climate change happening even faster than what people are screaming about today.

You say we can only attribute about 10% of the warming to the sun today. Really. And this is some definitive number from people who really have not yet figured out all the intricacies and relationships that make up weather, let alone climate. Face it, we do NOT understand all of the influences that affect climate so to make claims that man made CO2 is CAUSING this to happen is just an outright unsubstantiated and unsupportable claim.

Finally - one more poke at the sun. If the little ice age was "caused" by the sun but now only 10% of warming can be attributed to the sun, we go back to where I started. Stopping what you claim is man made global warming (since it ain't the sun you say) would therefore result in our plunging back into another little ice age because the sun isn't warming us enough to get us out of it. So which do you want, ice age or warmer climate?

Chose wisely.

Here, here!

95% of all scientist say you are an ignorant moron.

Lance - Ah, the perfect example of a blind dogmatic response. Call someone names. Very good.

Lance - Ah, the perfect example of a blind dogmatic response. Call someone names. Very good.

Because an unqualified poster is denying proven science and conclusions of almost all of the world's qualified minds.

What would you call it?

Actually we can go back to look at millions of years worth of previous "games".

Why don't you at least read the science before you try and knock it?

Not read people who knock the science, but read the actual science for yourself.

Go back to Fox Noose Jethro.

There are a number of reasons, including La Nina, why each successive month or year won't set a new air temperature record despite slowly increasing CO2 levels. The most reliable indicator of global warming is ocean heat content, and 2011 set a new record for the global annual average (see NOAA/NODC websites for details).

Eric - There you go, taking ONE YEAR and using that as evidence of a trend or to prove a long term change. That's like taking a single data point and proclaiming you have a pattern.

I do believe the earth is warming quite simply I think it SHOULD be warming since the little ice age only ended about 150 years ago. After all, if it wasn't warming then we would still be IN the little ice age now wouldn't we? Now if you believe MAN is causing this with our industrialization then that mean the climate BEFORE industrialization was what you would consider "normal". Problem is, the climate at that point WAS the little ice age which was a rapid and major change from the climate that existed before it. So tell me, what is the climate "supposed" to be? What state of climate are we trying to achieve with all of this cutting CO2, etc.?