If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Thanks to global warming, this February will be the coldest in 30 years   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 207
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

1989 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Feb 2007 at 10:27 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



207 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-02-05 10:31:11 AM
Do people really think temporary, localized weather patterns debunk global warming?
 
2007-02-05 10:32:04 AM
Perhaps global warming should be changed to Global Climate Change. Since I am pretty sure that some places of the earth will become warmer and other places will experience cold.
 
2007-02-05 10:32:52 AM
Ignoring the fact that 2005 was the warmest in history, and that 2007 is expecting to beat that. But then again it depends whether you believe in science or not.
 
2007-02-05 10:33:02 AM
FSM, people still play the "haha globla warming is fake cuz its cold" card?

/was pretty sure that card was relegated to Type I tournaments only
 
2007-02-05 10:33:03 AM
Global warming is about average global temperature.
 
2007-02-05 10:33:05 AM
Thanks to ignorance, people still think Global Warming means the entire planet gets warmer.
 
2007-02-05 10:34:08 AM
www.purplemoon.com

Global Warming Thread = Hot Pirate Babes
 
2007-02-05 10:36:18 AM
HotWingConspiracy -

I dunno. Do people really think that 150 years of record keeping can affirm a theory regarding a million+ year old planet?
 
2007-02-05 10:36:53 AM
I just wish it'd regionally warm.

/friggin' cold out there
 
2007-02-05 10:37:43 AM
Do people really think temporary, localized weather patterns debunk global warming?

apparently as many as believe the opposite--a previously warm winter in the east has pundits going, "See!" ad nauseum the past 2 months. annecdote seems to rule in this debate
 
2007-02-05 10:37:59 AM
Global Warming Thread = Hot Pirate Babes

I suddenly find myself caring about global warming.
 
2007-02-05 10:38:32 AM
momentary coldness in the coldest part of winter COMPLETELY disproves a century of increasing temperatures.
 
2007-02-05 10:38:42 AM
HotWingConspiracy: Do people really think temporary, localized weather patterns debunk global warming?

Yes and others think that unusually warm days prove global warming. Neither are right.
 
2007-02-05 10:39:19 AM
Well, yeah, the Upper Midwest is skewing the average for the rest of the world. They took all the cold in the world and put it here.
 
2007-02-05 10:39:19 AM
Gieg is not amused by anectdote.
 
2007-02-05 10:39:35 AM
twobux: million+ year old planet

I think you meant "50,000 year old planet". Heathen.
 
2007-02-05 10:40:42 AM
"I dunno. Do people really think that 150 years of record keeping can affirm a theory regarding a million+ year old planet?"

I dunno. Do people really think that 150 years worth of records was the only point of reference used to build the theory?
 
2007-02-05 10:41:54 AM
Global warming is about fear mongering and control.

/the question isn't to wonder why
//but only to evolve or die
///today's conservationist = tomorrow's dinosaur
////would love to live on a stable planet, problem is, life would've never evolved enough chaos to create us
//strange loops, slashies, ftw!!!
////I'm the unintended consequence your parents never knew to warn you about
 
2007-02-05 10:43:02 AM
an unseasonably warmer winter COMPLETELY proves a century of increasing temperatures.
 
2007-02-05 10:43:12 AM
I think I'll keep listening to the scientists, thanks.
 
2007-02-05 10:43:26 AM
twobux
We have records dating back over 250,000 years and theories dating over millions. ask a scientist.

nekom
you are correct, but the ones that are educated know the truth... which is it exists and we are the cause. read a peer-reviewd article to be sure.
 
2007-02-05 10:43:57 AM
flavor of the month

momentary coldness in the coldest part of winter COMPLETELY disproves a century of increasing temperatures.

Well if you can use a century to prove a theory about millions of years then I can use a day to prove a pattern of a century
 
2007-02-05 10:44:16 AM
What was the average temperature in 1950?
What was the average temperature in 1450?
What was the average temperature in 350?
What was the average temperature in 350 BC?
What was the average temperature in 1450 BC?
What was the average temperature in 1950 BC?
What was the average temperature in 5000 BC?

We can't even come CLOSE to having an accurate answer - or an approximate answer - to the last questions.
 
2007-02-05 10:45:16 AM
darkyn


I think I'll keep listening to the scientists, thanks.

Why do that when there are so many proud graduates of the AM Radio Ph.D. Program right here on Fark?
 
2007-02-05 10:45:27 AM
Here's another thought on good ole GW... even average temperatures over a short period of time (geologically speaking) show only a trend and no more...trends change and we're still just coming out of a cooling trend after the the Middle Ages Warm Period.

The current climate models used by paleo-climatologists are incomplete, and when today's characteristics are expected as a result of known variables...it comes out wrong.

That isn't to say that there is no warming trend locally/globally but to PROVE it scientifically you need more than a consensus... 90% sure = they couldn't reproduce it in a lab.

Should they continue to work on the models? sure why not? Anything giving us more knowledge about our planet is helpful, but PRACTICALITY should be a guide.
 
2007-02-05 10:45:33 AM
FTGodWin
Global warming is about fear mongering and control.

Yeah, it could never be about, oh, I dunno, actual climate change.
 
2007-02-05 10:45:38 AM
global warming > next ice age > giant alien spider invasion
 
2007-02-05 10:45:59 AM
Postal Penguin

Perhaps global warming should be changed to Global Climate Change. Since I am pretty sure that some places of the earth will become warmer and other places will experience cold.

Yeah, I am pretty sure you are right and all those scientists are wrong.

/Is this the new Republican line? If you can't deny it, change its name?
 
2007-02-05 10:47:07 AM
Global warming is old and outdated, most prefer to use Climate Change as the new moniker because it is far more accurate.

Record keeping from the last 150 years isn't all the data that has been included in the model, it is just the most accurate subset of the data. Ice cores, etc all provide valuable information as well.

Yes the Earth has natural cycles that change our climate what with the Ice Ages and all that.

If you seriously think dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at the rate we do has NO effect on climate and may have serious repercussions then you are an idiot.
 
2007-02-05 10:47:26 AM
I have a copy of the Neanderthal Alamanc and I can tell you it was substantially colder back then then it is now.
 
2007-02-05 10:48:03 AM
People's perspective to Global Warming is hilarious. When we had that heat wave during the end of July, even Pat Robertson was bowing his head to global warming. Now that we have a cold snap during February, people are jumping right back on the Global Warming Is A Myth wagon.

As far as I'm concerned, if you want some good proof of the regional effects of global warming, look at all of the flowers that bloomed in January all over the East Coast. I had a forsythia bush that started blooming (here in West Virginia) and I have daffodils that have bud heads all but ready to open. Well... that was before this cold snap, at least.
 
2007-02-05 10:48:41 AM
FASIV and theories dating over millions (of years)

A theory that is older than a million years? And they havent proved it yet. Must be a sucky theory.
 
2007-02-05 10:49:06 AM
First of all, I'm not an idiot. Secondly, you cannot prove that anything humans have done causes your "global warming." Volcanoes, if anything, would be more likely to cause "global warming."
 
2007-02-05 10:49:19 AM
TechnoHead
/Is this the new Republican line? If you can't deny it, change its name?

It is called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Duh.
 
2007-02-05 10:50:05 AM
Fact: We are contributing to global warming by releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Take all the carbon on earth and burn it into the atmosphere, and the earth will be like venus.

Fact: No one can agree to the rate of affected change, partially due to the fact we have only a snapshot of our current geological data.

Fact: The only reliable indication is an accurate measurement of changes in Thermohaline circulation.

Fact: Half the people on the planet have no clue as to what global warming is.
 
2007-02-05 10:50:10 AM
record warm temperatures = global warming
record cold temperatures = global warming
active hurricane season = global warming
passive hurricane season = global warming
 
2007-02-05 10:51:29 AM
TDBoedy: That isn't to say that there is no warming trend locally/globally but to PROVE it scientifically you need more than a consensus... 90% sure = they couldn't reproduce it in a lab.

Lots of things can't be reproduced in a lab because hell not all science takes place inside a "lab", and some things just can't be reproduced accurately. 95% is the most normal cut-off for statistical significance, and 90% is pretty damn good too.

Should they continue to work on the models? sure why not? Anything giving us more knowledge about our planet is helpful, but PRACTICALITY should be a guide.

Of course they should, and the models are incomplete, but they are also pretty decent in terms of models. To re-iterate something I posted above, to think that human activity has had no negative impact on our climate is foolish. Luckily we can do something about it because it isn't irreversible. Continuing to dump pollutants into the world and atmosphere when we can change things is foolish.
 
2007-02-05 10:51:30 AM
"First of all, I'm not an idiot."

then

"Volcanoes, if anything, would be more likely to cause "global warming."

Yeah, I'm with darkyn. I'll stick with the scientists on this one.
 
2007-02-05 10:52:11 AM
I all actuality, the people arguing against the climate change are actually arguing for pollution.
I don't understand the thinking that pollution is good.
 
2007-02-05 10:52:44 AM
lindsay lohan goes to rehab = global warming
colts win super bowl = global warming
Fark TV debuts = global warming
"Lost" still incomprehensible = global warming
Paris Hilton herpes = that slutty El Nino
 
2007-02-05 10:52:44 AM
What I'm curious about is: if global warming is supposedly man-made, what caused the ice sheets that covered North America and Europe to melt?

As well, why did pollution contribute to GW in the 20th (with all the environmental controls, etc...), but apparently from the 18th century-WWII there was no spike in temperatures?
 
2007-02-05 10:53:05 AM
I'm so glad that I have red-state Farkers to help me see the lies of mainstream science for what they really are.
 
2007-02-05 10:53:37 AM
atomsmoosher

It is called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Duh.


Duh, indeed.

Back in the '80s, when the corporations started getting bad press for firing thousands of workers due to "downsizing", they changed the name to "rightsizing".

Of course, they kept firing thousands of people but under a different name.

It's as if the same people that run the corporations run the Republican Party.

/oh, wait a minute
 
2007-02-05 10:53:59 AM
HotWingConspiracy: Do people really think temporary, localized weather patterns debunk global warming?

A warm December proved global warming to some people. What makes you think that a cold February wouldn't convince others that there is global cooling?
 
2007-02-05 10:54:08 AM
HotWingConspiracy -

The same scientists will tell you that volcanoes will expel more of the greenhouse gases in eruptions than humans have.
 
2007-02-05 10:54:45 AM
twobux: First of all, I'm not an idiot. Secondly, you cannot prove that anything humans have done causes your "global warming." Volcanoes, if anything, would be more likely to cause "global warming."

Yea, the volcano line. Except you know, the Earth has always had volcanoes and I'm sure there are periods of the near geologic past that had much more volcano activity than we do as well.

Bonkthat_Again: Fact: We are contributing to global warming by releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Take all the carbon on earth and burn it into the atmosphere, and the earth will be like venus.

Fact: No one can agree to the rate of affected change, partially due to the fact we have only a snapshot of our current geological data.


Exactly. Yes there are tons of other factors changing our climate by purely natural means. The planet does have climate cycles and all. As you said, humans are actively contributing though.
 
2007-02-05 10:55:07 AM
Source: Wii Forecast Channel

CURRENT TEMPERATURES (from warmest to coldest):

NUUK, GREENLAND: 44
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA: 14
ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA: 8
SOUTH POLE: 0
DES MOINES, IOWA: -1
DETROIT, MICHIGAN: -3
CLEVELAND, OHIO: -3
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA: -3
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA: -4
FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA: -5
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS: -9
MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN: -11
GREEN BAY, WISCONSIN: -13
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA: -15
MADISON, WISCONSIN: -16
BRAINERD, MINNESOTA: -18
YELLOWKNIFE, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES: -18
FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA: -20
WINNIPEG, MANITOBA: -26
CHURCHILL, MANITOBA: -28 (coldest place on Earth)

Have a nice day, commuters.
 
2007-02-05 10:55:22 AM
i much prefer arguing about global warming than trying to learn anything about it.
 
2007-02-05 10:56:17 AM
twobux shows off his educational level by posting the following,

What was the average temperature in 1950?
What was the average temperature in 1450?
What was the average temperature in 350?
What was the average temperature in 350 BC?
What was the average temperature in 1450 BC?
What was the average temperature in 1950 BC?
What was the average temperature in 5000 BC?

We can't even come CLOSE to having an accurate answer - or an approximate answer - to the last questions.


That must be why we don't know there was an ice age that ended 10,000 years ago. In fact, if you spend a few minutes searching for the information you could learn what year it started and what year it ended.

Going through life with a viscous disdain for knowledge is the true definition of a brain at waste.
 
2007-02-05 10:56:30 AM
ten_of_spades: As well, why did pollution contribute to GW in the 20th (with all the environmental controls, etc...), but apparently from the 18th century-WWII there was no spike in temperatures?

I believe there is something about total global output to be considered. Probably something about levels needing to cross some critical threshold as well.
 
Displayed 50 of 207 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report