Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Winter Simply Won’t Give Up

Storm arriving with just days until spring

March 17, 2014

CHARLESTON (AP) — Spring is just days away but winter is not leaving quietly....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(84)

swingdog

Mar-22-14 9:04 PM

Again, dah, GLOBAL! It is undoubtedly hard for you to grasp, but the world climate is not limited to a single region or country.

In terms of how the coming decades play out, I have no illusions that the process of human influenced global warming will end before extremely serious impacts take place. They are already happening. Your children will inherit a far less nurturing world than you or I did when we were young. I wish them well, but I fear that they and many others will ask why we refused to accept responsibility for our actions and failed to correct the abuses that the vast majority of climate scientists warned us would spell disaster for future generations.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-22-14 6:08 PM

The three biggest lies:

"The check is in the mail"

"If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance"

"The Science is settled"

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-22-14 6:07 PM

slumdog, don't let facts confuse you!

Dr. Gordon Moore: “When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an ice age occurred 450 million years ago when carbon dioxide was 10 times higher than today.”

Moore also noted that “The increase in temperature between 1910 and 1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970 and 2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910–1940 to human influence.” Why then, he asks, “does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by human influence, when it has no explanation for nearly identical increase from 1910 to 1940?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-22-14 6:03 PM

Slumdog when you are drowning in the Ohio River is it of any consequence that there is a drought in Australia at the same time?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-22-14 5:50 PM

USA today:

Miley Cyrus was a baby and Bill Clinton had just been inaugurated the last time this happened: For the first time in 20 years, the USA saw more record cold temperatures than record hot temperatures in 2013, according to statistics from the National Climatic Data Center.

"For the first year since 1993, there were more daily record lows than daily highs that were either tied or set in 2013," reported Weather Channel meteorologist Guy Walton, who keeps track of the data from the climate center.

Through Dec. 28, there have been 11,852 daily record lows in 2013, compared with 10,073 daily record highs, according to Walton.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

swingdog

Mar-22-14 2:33 PM

dah - GLOBAL! It really seems difficult for you to grasp that term.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-22-14 11:01 AM

Don't let the facts confuse there, DawgiDoo:

For the second consecutive year, U.S. March tornado counts are among the lowest on record.

Through March 20, only four tornadoes have been confirmed across the nation. According to The Weather Channel's severe weather expert Dr. Greg Forbes ( only two other Marches have featured fewer tornadoes through the first 20 days of March, dating to 1950:

• 1969: 0 tornadoes

• 1951: 3 tornadoes

However, the lowest March U.S. tornado count on record dating to 1950 was six tornadoes in March 1951, according to Forbes. IF THE REST OF THE MONTH FEATURES AT MOST ONE ADDITIONAL TORNADO, WE WOULD SET A RECORD LOW FOR THE MONTH.

If this sounds familiar, March 2013 was the least tornadic March in 35 years, with only 18 tornadoes.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Mar-22-14 2:13 AM

In the spirit of giving credit where credit is due: The Folly of Thinking We Know The Painful Hunt for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 By PICO IYERMARCH 20, 2014

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Mar-22-14 2:05 AM

From the New York Times (of all places). "The Nobel Prize-winning economist and psychologist Daniel Kahneman has noted, after decades of research, that it’s our nature to overestimate how much we understand the world and to underestimate the role of chance. And it’s our folly to assume we know very much at all. There’s “a highly objectionable word,” he writes, “which should be removed from our vocabulary in discussions of major events,” and that word is “knew.”

This is about the search for MH370 but it applies here also.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Mar-22-14 1:50 AM

Seventy three comments and no solutions. It's the weather, fools, adapt or perish.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BigMike

Mar-22-14 1:50 AM

Seventy three comments and no solutions. It's the weather, fools, adapt or perish.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

swingdog

Mar-21-14 10:34 PM

"Those who can , DO.

Those who can't ----- write condescending pontification in local rags," dah

Yep, sure sounds familiar!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-21-14 8:37 PM

Slumdog it was right before the Y2K scam and after the First Earth Day Global COOLING alarmists celebration.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

swingdog

Mar-21-14 4:43 PM

Hmmm, was this before or after the Garden of Eden?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-21-14 1:08 PM

FOURTH CHANCE:

Slumdawg, dazzle us with your brilliance and answer this simple question:

"None of the scientist wannebe's here can answer my simple question:

Tell us liberal rocket scientists, if you had the power of God and could lower the CO2 to 150 ppm, would you DO IT???

YES or NO??______________________???

"

OK we will NEVER get an scientific answer from a retired park ranger, so here it is, boys and girls.

At 150 ppm of CO2 we ALL DIE! Because that is the minimum level to sustain plant life and with no plants, no food for herbivores. No herbivores, no carnivores. And THEN, no MAN.

Earth hit 2000 ppm before man existed, it was the Garden of Eden with lush vegetation. We are only 250 ppm above the min level to sustain life.

Don't worry, be happy, mon :)!

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-21-14 1:04 PM

Says the retired park ranger in Poverty Neck, WV, 50 of 50 states in mental health.

Those who can , DO.

Those who can't move to 26003 and write condescending pontification in local rags.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

swingdog

Mar-21-14 12:53 PM

dah, no wonder the 3% get so much attention. They make 10 times as much noise as the 97%. If verbosity and plain old B.S. were the hallmarks of science you would be considered a genius. As it is you are just a verbose B.S.'r. You are the perfect model for the old saying, "All talk and no do."

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:55 PM

---unlike----

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:54 PM

John R. Christy is a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and Alabama state climatologist.

In other words, a REAL Climate Scientist, unless the BS artists John Hansen of NASA, the Godfather of Global Warming (Astrophyics), Michael Mann, inventor of the Hockey Stick (Degree in Geology!), and the head of the UN IPCC, Dr. Pachuri who got the Nobel Prize with Al Gore and is the Keeper of the World Data on Global has a PHD...... in ECONOMICS!!!

These are the Fuax Climate Scientists that Slum Dawg THINKS are experts on the subject.

Pachuri IS an expert on how to CON Industrial Nations out of BILLIONS to redistribute to THIRD WORLDS POLLUTERS like INDIA, which SHAZAM is his home country. GEEEEEEEEE.....

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:48 PM

Others might look to certain climate anomalies and convince themselves that humans are the cause. I often hear claims that extreme weather is getting worse. Now, here we do have direct evidence to check. Whether it’s tornadoes (no change over the past 60 years), hurricanes (no changes over the past 120 years) or droughts and heat waves (not as bad as they were during the past 1,000 years), the evidence doesn’t support those claims. So, we argue.

Without direct evidence and with poor model predictability, what other avenues are available to us? This is where things get messy because we are humans, and humans tend to select those avenues that confirm their biases. (It seems to me that the less direct evidence there is for a position, the more passion is applied and the more certainty is claimed.)

One avenue many folks tend to latch onto is the self-selected “authority.” Once selected, this “authority” does the thinking for them.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:47 PM

Christy: "For example, I analyzed the tropical atmospheric temperature change in 102 of the latest climate-model simulations covering the past 35 years. The temperature of this region is a key target variable because it is tied directly to the response to extra greenhouse gases in models. If greenhouse gases are warming the Earth, this is the first place to look.

All 102 model runs overshot the actual temperature change on average by a factor of three. Not only does this tell us we don’t have a good grasp on the way climate varies, but the fact that all simulations overcooked the atmosphere means there is probably a warm bias built into the basic theory — the same theory we’ve been told is “settled science.”

To me, being off by a factor of three doesn’t qualify as “settled.”

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:45 PM

Climate science is a murky science. When dealing with temperature variations and trends, we do not have an instrument that tells us how much change is due to humans and how much to Mother Nature. Measuring the temperature change over long time periods is difficult enough, but we do not have a thermometer that says why these changes occur.

We cannot appeal to direct evidence for the cause of change, so we argue.

The real climate system is so massively complex we do not have the ability to test global-size theories in a laboratory. Without this ability, we tend to travel all sorts of other avenues to confirm what are essentially our unprovable views about climate. These avenues tend to comfort our souls because we crave certainty over ambiguity.

IT IS A FUNDAMENTAL CHARACTERISTIC OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND, THEREFORE, OF THE CONFIDENCE WE HAVE IN OUR THEORIES, THAT WHEN WE FINALLY UNDERSTAND A SYSTEM, WE ARE ABLE TO PREDICT ITS BEHAVIOR.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:43 PM

Climate Scientist John R. Cristy March 20, 2014:

" Climate models overcook the planet by a factor of 3 times; the science isn't "settled"

"Why do we argue about climate change?

The reason there is so much contention regarding “global warming” is relatively simple to understand: In climate change science we basically cannot prove anything about how the climate will change as a result of adding extra greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

So we are left to argue about unprovable claims.

We can measure and prove that greenhouse gases are increasing. And, in the laboratory, we can measure and prove that adding greenhouse gases to a jar of air will lead to further warming.

But when it comes to how the actual climate system might respond to extra greenhouse gases, we’re out of luck in terms of “proof” because the climate’s complexities are innumerable and poorly understood."

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:14 PM

--withOUT Google---

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Mar-20-14 10:13 PM

Notice wheezerdawg continues to duck my question because

1) He hasn't a clue with Google

2) To answer it honestly would require admission that CO2 hype is much ado about a trace gas that is vital to life, NOT global warming.

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 84 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: