Can you tell what this is a picture of? Look very carefully in the box. What do you see?
It’s “Global Warming,” in May of 2008, in Wyoming, Nebraska, and South Dakota right now. It’s what a lot of people are looking at, rather than traveling, because they’re snowed in. That’s right! May 2, 2008.
See: WYDOT Road Closures and CBS4Denver.com and the Sioux Falls Argus Leader
BRRRRRR…..!
Click here or on the image below to watch a footage of the late winter storm.
Dear “Jenn Sierra”,
Climate change is not he same as the state of the weather outside your window.
You are making the same forehead-slapping mistake that Pat Robertson did when he “converted” to “belief” in global warming during a heat wave.
Your post here reflects an all-too-common misunderstanding of what global warming is; an egregious error that is the result of a kind of pernicious solipsism: “if I don’t see it, then it aint’ happenin.’”
Reading this post, and others like it, shows a kind of ignorance comparable to a Creationist saying, “If evolution is true, ‘den why are ‘der still monkeys?”
The fact that the content and ignorant back-patting, righteous swagger of this post does not embarrass you shows the poverty of your understanding. I mean, the claim of this post is considered antiquated and obsolete even by most current global warming denialists. If there is a way to make yourself an embarrassment and laughingstock even among those of whom you’d consider your allies, well, congratulations.
Now, I’m by no means a specialist, scientist, or an expert on these things, but allow me explain, in simple words:
Again, “climate change” is not the same as weather. Climate change is differences in average temperature, rainfall, seasonal weather patterns, etc. An unusually cold day during the summer, or a warm day during the winter, is not evidence for or against climate change, but merely ever-changing dynamics of a regional, seasonal weather system. Global warming causes climate change; this is a slow, gradual change that occurs over larger periods of time than what a week of blizzard, or a heat wave, will evince. Thousands of years of averages are compared to past decades of C02 levels, precipitations levels, 02 levels, etc., and not to a period of icemelt a few weeks ago. The fact that the weatherman’s predictions are off has absolutely no bearing on the truth or falsity of climate change. Thinking that it does is a complete non sequitur.
Seasons have regular ebbs and flows of high and low temperature. Concerning these frequencies, climate change—spurred by global warming, can actually lead to deeper troughs and wider wavelengths on graphs showing seasonal climate activity. In the future, a long period of very cold and snowy winters can actually be the result of global climate change. Global warming does not mean “everything is hot all the time” and, when it is cold, proves to be contrary evidence. I hear this nonsense all the time: “It is cold during winter! Haha! Beat that, global-warmin’-lovin’ libruls!”
From the US Geological Survey: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/leads.asp?ID=1613:
…[W]eather and climate are not the same. Weather is the state of the atmosphere (i.e. temperature, precipitation, wind) for a particular time and place. Climate is the average weather conditions for a place over a longer period of time.”
This caricatured, straw-man version of what you think “global warming” amounts to should elicit a deep and abiding shame; especially since you are posting on this blog; published and condoned by you. For your sake, I’m glad you intellectually flagellate and humiliate yourself behind the privacy of the web, and not on a soapbox in public somewhere. With the amount of information on this topic that is available, one would have to actively work to be as ignorant on the issues as you are; a feat not easily accomplished, believe me. Again, a confederation of dunces would quickly crown you as their king.
Though I’m wasting my time here (I know you won’t visit or read the content on any of these links), I’ve taken the time to post a few links to some (prima facie) non-partisan websites concerning climate change and global warming. I implore you: for a few minutes, turn off Rush Limbaugh, stop reading Kent Hovind, and please try do a little homework before embarrassing yourself and parading your sophistic nonsense on the net. (By all means, I’ll defend your right to do it—the more you post, the better I look).
“Fourth Report of The Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change:” http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-syr.htm
“NOAA on Global Warming: Frequently Asked Questions” http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
“Common Misconceptions about Abrupt Climate Change” http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12455&tid=282&cid=10149
“NASA Worldbook: “Global Warming” http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/global_warming_worldbook.html
Probably more appropriate: “EPA Climate Change Website for Kids” http://epa.gov/climatechange/kids/index.html
Bad Statistical Reasoning about Weather and Climate http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/02/bad_statistical_reasoning_abou.php#more
I’ve been reading this for a quite a while now, and this post truly reflects one of the apices of your self-congratulatory, dogmatic parades of ignorance. It is rather masochistic that I keep reading it; it was a choice between gouging my eyes out, or responding (I just had to this time).
Knowing how denialists handle dissention, I’m pretty sure this will just be deleted from comments section, or in some way be denied from ever being shown. This whole blog is a testament to a handsome talent cultivated in insulating and immunizing oneself to other views (dogmatists are good at this). Will “daring” you to post it unaltered guarantee that it will show up in the comments? I know many conservatives invest a lot into elaborate façades of masculinity; will avoiding the label of “coward” guarantee that it will be posted unaltered on your website? (Heck, I’d be even more surprised if you read this far!)
Best,
AM
AM has no sense of humor.
Nope, he/she sure doesn’t. heh
Of course there’s climate change. It’s been changing constantly for eons. Jiminy Crickets.
Let me get this straight. We are not in an Ice Age ergo the Earth is warming. Gee and I thought the question was whether it was a natural or man-made or just how much influence man and the industrial age has had on the warming.
I read about two paragraphs of AM’s comment before giving up on it. It is so dripping with condescension it is simply intolerable. My God, what would any of us do without his towering intellect to show up the way? We’d be lost, lost I say.
As Kate rightly points out, there is always climate change. At the moment the evidence indicates there has been no net global warming since the late 90s. But that little fact has no impact on the global warming faithful. They continue to point to the “scientific consensus,” completely ignoring the fact that science has never been conducted by consensus.
Jenn and the rest of use here at FHK know full well the difference between climate change and weather. We also recognize the difference between science and politics. You, apparently, do not. If you did you’d recognize that there are a lot of climate scientists who do not believe we are experiencing global warming. There are plenty more who think there may be some global warming but that it is completely beyond human control. But that doesn’t have any impact on people like you. Al Gore, no scientist, is your expert and he can do or say no wrong.
So AM and all the little global warming minions will continue to spout their propaganda. Meanwhile, the rest of the world will continue noticing that the evidence simply doesn’t support their consensus.
And by the way AM, we have never been in the habit of censoring comments. If you are vulgar you risk deletion but being wrong doesn’t get your comment deleted. Even being an ass doesn’t do it as evidenced by the fact your comment is here for all to see. You see, we WANT people to read your comment. We figure most will reach the same conclusion we’ve reached. And those that don’t will probably be good for a laugh or two as well.
Hi Jenn — Something about this particular comment thread got me thinking about that particularly annoying breed of nasty, arrogant, pompous, self-important jerks. They’re really annoying when they’ve been proven wrong by their intellectual superiors. Guess we all have to deal with them. Luvya, Roger G.
Well, I choose to deal with them by laughing at them, Roger. ;-)
[…] be like “That Guy” who wrote a dissertation in response to last Friday’s funny on […]
RSS feed for comments on this post | TrackBack URI
Name (required)
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Website
The .577 T-Rex rifle has a massive recoil. Watch these people trying to handle this weapon and see what happens...(Video)
Get up now Get up now Get up out of bed Wash your face Brush your teeth Comb your sleepy head Here’s your clothes And your shoes Hear the words I said Get up now Get up and make your bed Are you hot? Are you cold? Are you wearing that...(Video and Lyrics)
Stephen King must really be desperate to sell whatever drivel he’s managed to translate from his demented brain to the keyboard....(Continue Reading)
What do you get when you cross toothpaste, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton? Hill-Billy Toothpaste...(Photo)
The “That Guy,” syndrome can make someone obnoxious, nerdy, or offensive. Unfortunately, there is a “That Guy” syndrome online, too. Following are a few ways to avoid being, “That Guy,” online...(Continue Reading)
...We are assured that the photos will be destroyed as soon as it is determined we are not a threat. [Anyone want to take bets on how long it will be before airport security images of celebrities begin hitting the internet?]...(Continue Reading and Answer Poll)
How to talk to a "Truther," if you must. (Archive)
He is of course, almost entirely, except his acting is less convincing, and his goals are different, but just as er, unfortunate. Yep, at heart, Left Liberal’s are essentialy control freak, Totalitarian Fascist’s who believe in big government and state power to control ever more individual freedoms, but not theirs...(Continue Reading)
Try this simple experiment at home and follow along. Take a mirror and place the reflective side facing you. What do you see?...(Continue Reading)
DR. PHIL: The problem we have here is that this chicken won’t realize that he must first deal with the problem on THIS side of the road before it goes after the problem on the OTHER SIDE of the road. What we need to do is help him realize how stupid he’s acting by not taking on his CURRENT problems before adding NEW problems.
OPRAH: Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is why he wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I’m going to give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and not live his life like the rest of the chickens...(Continue Reading)
Orlando has been busy locating the best videos on the web, of interest to conservatives. Some are informational, and some are funny - we especially like the ones making fun of liberals...(View the Archive, Here)
In an effort to clear out criminals in the area, Iraqi army soldiers raided several houses in the city of Jabella, Iraq, May 2. With support from coalition forces, the raid resulted in the detainment of 29 suspected insurgents. Soldiers with the 3rd Battalion, 31st Brigade, 8th IA Division, led the early morning raid, with help from Soldiers with Company B, 2nd Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, currently attached to the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division....(Rosemary's Thoughts)
...There are plenty of examples of the moronic reaction to the so called cross. Google “Huckabee cross” and you will find quite a few items about it. Remember, it caused such a controversy that Huckabee had to defend it and tell people it was a bookcase. Now enter Barack Hussein Obama, the presumptive nominee for the Democratic party, and see what he is spreading around Kentucky...(Big Dog's Weblog)
Well, I've put it off for as long as I could. I haven't wanted to have a lot to say about the upcoming WV election. I like to see how the multitude of sides spin things first, because there's a lot to tell in who goes negative on the people of West Virginia first. Ding. Ding. Ding. We now have a winner...(Buzzardbilly: Appalachian Being)
In the “a picture is worth a thousand words” category, Newsweek has apparently tried to take disrespect for America a few steps further than TIME magazine did a few weeks ago. In doing so, Newsweek uses a rear view of the Statue of Liberty as well as a “USA #2″ image to signify their view of America’s decline...(Creeping Sharia)
In his victory speech after the North Carolina primary, Sen. Barack Obama said something that is all the more remarkable for how little it has been remarked upon. In defending his stated intent to meet with America's enemies without preconditions, Sen. Obama said: "I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did...." (Invincible Armor)
There is a news report starting to make the rounds amongst the MSM on a study that claims to have discovered why conservatives tend to be happier than liberals and it is just the sort of bilge that the MSM loves to promulgate. We may see more of it over the next several days because, while it is titled “Conservatives Happier Than Liberals,” it is basically saying that the reason conservatives are happier is because they just don’t care about other people....(Publius' Forum)
This is the same idiocy as treating arrested Islamic terrorists as criminals, instead of putting them up against the wall. The evidence that jihadi’s, once released or ‘escaped’ from prison, return to the battlefield, is overwhelming. A dead enemy doesn’t return to kill your soldiers. The French should know that.
Main opposition group in Somali says ‘France lacks the legal mandate’ to charge the six pirates who have held Le Ponant and its crew hostage....(Sheik Yer Mami)
WWF Facebook Group
FHK on YouTube
Web2.0 Wiki
The WebWarriors of Ft. Hard Knox (WWF) will be offering a series of Web2.0 workshops online.
Watch this space for further details as they become available.
If you would like to learn more about this exciting project, and others, please make plans to attend the next WWF Vault Party, by signing up here. (Facebook account required.)
*The opinions of our collaborators, sponsors and guest authors, expressed on FHK or elsewhere on the web, do not necessarily reflect the opinion of FHK. We appreciate, however, their contributions and widely-varying perspectives on an impressive variety of topics.
For more info on how to become an FHK Collaborator, see the About the FHK Project
The WebWarriors of Ft. Hard Knox (WWF) will be offering a series of Web2.0 workshops online.
Dear “Jenn Sierra”,
Climate change is not he same as the state of the weather outside your window.
You are making the same forehead-slapping mistake that Pat Robertson did when he “converted” to “belief” in global warming during a heat wave.
Your post here reflects an all-too-common misunderstanding of what global warming is; an egregious error that is the result of a kind of pernicious solipsism: “if I don’t see it, then it aint’ happenin.’”
Reading this post, and others like it, shows a kind of ignorance comparable to a Creationist saying, “If evolution is true, ‘den why are ‘der still monkeys?”
The fact that the content and ignorant back-patting, righteous swagger of this post does not embarrass you shows the poverty of your understanding. I mean, the claim of this post is considered antiquated and obsolete even by most current global warming denialists. If there is a way to make yourself an embarrassment and laughingstock even among those of whom you’d consider your allies, well, congratulations.
Now, I’m by no means a specialist, scientist, or an expert on these things, but allow me explain, in simple words:
Again, “climate change” is not the same as weather. Climate change is differences in average temperature, rainfall, seasonal weather patterns, etc. An unusually cold day during the summer, or a warm day during the winter, is not evidence for or against climate change, but merely ever-changing dynamics of a regional, seasonal weather system. Global warming causes climate change; this is a slow, gradual change that occurs over larger periods of time than what a week of blizzard, or a heat wave, will evince. Thousands of years of averages are compared to past decades of C02 levels, precipitations levels, 02 levels, etc., and not to a period of icemelt a few weeks ago. The fact that the weatherman’s predictions are off has absolutely no bearing on the truth or falsity of climate change. Thinking that it does is a complete non sequitur.
Seasons have regular ebbs and flows of high and low temperature. Concerning these frequencies, climate change—spurred by global warming, can actually lead to deeper troughs and wider wavelengths on graphs showing seasonal climate activity. In the future, a long period of very cold and snowy winters can actually be the result of global climate change. Global warming does not mean “everything is hot all the time” and, when it is cold, proves to be contrary evidence. I hear this nonsense all the time: “It is cold during winter! Haha! Beat that, global-warmin’-lovin’ libruls!”
From the US Geological Survey: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/leads.asp?ID=1613:
…[W]eather and climate are not the same. Weather is the state of the atmosphere (i.e. temperature, precipitation, wind) for a particular time and place. Climate is the average weather conditions for a place over a longer period of time.”
This caricatured, straw-man version of what you think “global warming” amounts to should elicit a deep and abiding shame; especially since you are posting on this blog; published and condoned by you. For your sake, I’m glad you intellectually flagellate and humiliate yourself behind the privacy of the web, and not on a soapbox in public somewhere. With the amount of information on this topic that is available, one would have to actively work to be as ignorant on the issues as you are; a feat not easily accomplished, believe me. Again, a confederation of dunces would quickly crown you as their king.
Though I’m wasting my time here (I know you won’t visit or read the content on any of these links), I’ve taken the time to post a few links to some (prima facie) non-partisan websites concerning climate change and global warming. I implore you: for a few minutes, turn off Rush Limbaugh, stop reading Kent Hovind, and please try do a little homework before embarrassing yourself and parading your sophistic nonsense on the net. (By all means, I’ll defend your right to do it—the more you post, the better I look).
“Fourth Report of The Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change:”
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-syr.htm
“NOAA on Global Warming: Frequently Asked Questions”
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
“Common Misconceptions about Abrupt Climate Change” http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12455&tid=282&cid=10149
“NASA Worldbook: “Global Warming”
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/global_warming_worldbook.html
Probably more appropriate: “EPA Climate Change Website for Kids”
http://epa.gov/climatechange/kids/index.html
Bad Statistical Reasoning about Weather and Climate
http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/02/bad_statistical_reasoning_abou.php#more
I’ve been reading this for a quite a while now, and this post truly reflects one of the apices of your self-congratulatory, dogmatic parades of ignorance. It is rather masochistic that I keep reading it; it was a choice between gouging my eyes out, or responding (I just had to this time).
Knowing how denialists handle dissention, I’m pretty sure this will just be deleted from comments section, or in some way be denied from ever being shown. This whole blog is a testament to a handsome talent cultivated in insulating and immunizing oneself to other views (dogmatists are good at this). Will “daring” you to post it unaltered guarantee that it will show up in the comments? I know many conservatives invest a lot into elaborate façades of masculinity; will avoiding the label of “coward” guarantee that it will be posted unaltered on your website? (Heck, I’d be even more surprised if you read this far!)
Best,
AM
AM has no sense of humor.
Nope, he/she sure doesn’t. heh
Of course there’s climate change. It’s been changing constantly for eons. Jiminy Crickets.
Let me get this straight. We are not in an Ice Age ergo the Earth is warming. Gee and I thought the question was whether it was a natural or man-made or just how much influence man and the industrial age has had on the warming.
I read about two paragraphs of AM’s comment before giving up on it. It is so dripping with condescension it is simply intolerable. My God, what would any of us do without his towering intellect to show up the way? We’d be lost, lost I say.
As Kate rightly points out, there is always climate change. At the moment the evidence indicates there has been no net global warming since the late 90s. But that little fact has no impact on the global warming faithful. They continue to point to the “scientific consensus,” completely ignoring the fact that science has never been conducted by consensus.
Jenn and the rest of use here at FHK know full well the difference between climate change and weather. We also recognize the difference between science and politics. You, apparently, do not. If you did you’d recognize that there are a lot of climate scientists who do not believe we are experiencing global warming. There are plenty more who think there may be some global warming but that it is completely beyond human control. But that doesn’t have any impact on people like you. Al Gore, no scientist, is your expert and he can do or say no wrong.
So AM and all the little global warming minions will continue to spout their propaganda. Meanwhile, the rest of the world will continue noticing that the evidence simply doesn’t support their consensus.
And by the way AM, we have never been in the habit of censoring comments. If you are vulgar you risk deletion but being wrong doesn’t get your comment deleted. Even being an ass doesn’t do it as evidenced by the fact your comment is here for all to see. You see, we WANT people to read your comment. We figure most will reach the same conclusion we’ve reached. And those that don’t will probably be good for a laugh or two as well.
Hi Jenn — Something about this particular comment thread got me thinking about that particularly annoying breed of nasty, arrogant, pompous, self-important jerks. They’re really annoying when they’ve been proven wrong by their intellectual superiors. Guess we all have to deal with them.
Luvya,
Roger G.
Well, I choose to deal with them by laughing at them, Roger. ;-)
[…] be like “That Guy” who wrote a dissertation in response to last Friday’s funny on […]