I had the thought of doing a very simple post with the following image from Accuweather…
Then, I was going to add some smug comments about the Copenhagen Confab and the irony therein. But, as usual, another story changed everything.
It seems that the AGW folks are covering all of their bases, based on this story from National Geographic (via Motor City Times).
Global warming could actually chill down North America within just a few decades, according to a new study that says a sudden cooling event gripped the region about 8,300 years ago. Analysis of ancient moss from Newfoundland, Canada, links an injection of freshwater from a burst glacial lake to a rapid drop in air temperatures by a few degrees Celsius along North America’s East Coast.
The results suggest that North America’s climate is highly sensitive to meltwater flowing into the ocean, said lead study author Tim Daley of Swansea University in the U.K.
The work also means that history could repeat itself: Currently Greenland’s ice sheet is melting at a rapid clip, releasing freshwater into the North Atlantic.
(Related: “Greenland Meltwater Can Drain Faster Than Niagara Falls.”)
In a worst-case scenario, the authors say, a sudden melt could trigger another regional cooling event—although other experts say today’s extreme, human-driven warming might cancel out any strong cooling effect.
OK, let’s get this into some perspective…
Q: What if it gets warmer?
A: It’s Global Warming! People need to give up their freedoms, their lifestyle, their cars, have only one child, and otherwise become slaves to the nanny state.
Q: What if it gets cooler?
A: It’s Global Warming! People need to give up their freedoms, their lifestyle, their cars, have only one child, and otherwise become slaves to the nanny state.
Q: What if temperatures remain stable?
A: It’s Global Warming! People need to give up their freedoms, their lifestyle, their cars, have only one child, and otherwise become slaves to the nanny state.
Q: What if the Cleveland Browns win a Super Bowl?
A: It’s Global Warming! People need to give up their freedoms, their lifestyle, their cars, have only one child, and otherwise become slaves to the nanny state.
Getting the idea? You can have fun with this by getting creative with the questions…
Q: What if Britney Spears is one day actually able to sing? (Actually, that’s a sign of the Apocalypse, so let’s leave that one alone)
Q: Joe Biden has a moment of clarity?
You get the idea. Have some fun with it.
h/t: Motor City Times
Visit Conservative Hideout RapidFire for all of your Conservative news, opinion, and blogging needs.
From Mark Levin’s book, Liberty and Tyranny here are a few of the over 500 hundred things that have been attributed to AGW. This list was compiled by Dr. John Brignell retired professor of industrial instrumentation at the University of Southampton in the UK and Mark included it in his amazing book.
acne
aggressive weeds
American dream end (although this might be legit…)
anaphylactic reactions to bee stings
beer shortage
birds confused
bubonic plague
cannibalism
early marriages
Earth lopsided
Earth to explode
fashion disaster
fish become deaf
frog with extra heads
gingerbread houses collapse
heart disease
hornets
inflation in China
invasion of cats
jets fall from the sky
kidney stones
kitten boom
Loch Ness monster dead
maple syrup shortage
monkeys on the move
Mount Everest shrinking
NFL threatened
popcorn rise
psychiatric illness (does being a flat earth, no growth, envirostatist count?)
railroad tracks deformed
rape wave
ruins ruined
school closures
sewer bills rise
sheep shrink
short-nosed dogs endangered
sour grapes
spiders invade Scotland
storms are wetter
suicide
tectonic plate movement
teenage drinking
ticks move northward
tourism decrease
tourism increase
truffle shortage
vampire moths
water bills double
weeds
whales move north
wind reduced
witchcraft executions
yellow fever
Man! Who squealed about the witch executions?? If I had time, I’d write all of these into a story. It’d be just as accurate as AGW, mind you. BTW, how are all the teens going to drink in the booze shortage?
If we’re actually getting COLDER, that’s a lot owrse than getting warmer…
But yeah, there’s a reason they shifted from “global warming” to “climate change.” Of course the climate has been changing since the earth was formed, and will continue to do so till it exists no more. And we humans don’t have much to do with it.
True, but that fact does not allow the left’s pursuit of power, so it has to be ignored.
This makes sense they can no longer blame Bush for everything. Now rather than take personal responsibility for their lives they can blame global warming. They have a drinking problem, it’s because of global warming.
Two winters ago while at a Navy school in Chicago we would have to muster outside in -10 degree weather. I would make sure everybody knew how concerned I was about global warming, by saying: “I hate global warming, this is BS it should be -12 right now!”
Well done Trestin, and again, thanks for your service! (In -10 or -12)
Q: What if the Lions win 8 games? (In one season of course, not spread across 4)
A: It global warming
During the run up to the COP15, I remember some of the global warming crowd saying something along the lines of “future generations will look back at this time and say, this was the moment when the world took decisive action to save the planet.”
If they do manage to reach their goals, (or even if they don’t) future generations will look back at the global warming fad, point and laugh at us. Much in the same way we look back and laugh at the goofy fads like pet rocks, mood rings and leisure suits.
BTW, thanks for the link.
No problem, thanks for pointing this out. Yeah, this will go down as the phrenology of the 21st century.
Geezus, Don. That list was so long I couldn’t find any comments.
Damn. I’m awfully disappointed about this cooling stuff. I was looking forward to eating polar bear and opening a palm tree farm in Alaska.
Snarky, this is AGW we’re talking about here. Just photochop yourself with some pics, and you’re golden. It’s all about the manipulation of the data, you know!
If we have a drought, it’s global warming. If we have to much rain, it’s global warming. If it’s hot, if it’s cold, if it’s sunny, if it’s cloudy, it is all global warming! Why do so many apparently intelligent people still believe all of this ridiculousness? Is ridiculousness even a word? I hope so because it describes global warming perfectly.
You would think it would be, however, wait until I release the alarmist from the mod queue.
Global warming will right itself as the huge ice cap in Greenland flows into the Atlantic a long dorminate virus will be release from the ice spreading into the worlds population and the “Satan Bug” will destroy all human life on the planet and mother nature will smile as the co2 levels drop and the deer no longer fear the hunters guns.
Damn it Ron, how many times do I have to tell you to not drink the Kool-Aid? It’s bad for you!
Do you know what a greenhouse is?
Have you ever been in one?
Was it hot?
Why?
Put simply, atmospheric CO2 has the same effect as the glass.
You can’t ignore the ample evidence of global warming just because you don’t like the implications.
You won’t be able to “hide the decline” here. We have the emails.
@Phil…CO2 is an infinitesimal part of our atmosphere. If you imagine a 10,000 seat stadium and each seat is a small part of the different types of gases in our atmosphere. In that case, CO2 would not even be 4 full seats.
But don’t take my word for it, the following info is from the U.S. Dept. of Energy, hat tip to the American Thinker:
“Numerous gases make up the Earth’s atmosphere. Of these, nitrogen represents about 78% by volume, oxygen comprises just under 21%, and other gases (including “greenhouse gases”) make up slightly over 1% by volume remaining. Of the principal greenhouse gases, water vapor is by far the most prevalent. Second place belongs to carbon dioxide (CO2) at 0.04% with methane and nitrous oxide finishing a very distant third and fourth.
What complicates analysis of any manmade greenhouse effect is the relatively overwhelming prevalence of water vapor — a gas ignored by the IPCC. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates water vapor makes up 95% of identified greenhouse gases and, of that amount, less than 0.001% can be attributed to manmade causes. Thus, the IPCC and AGW proponents have focused on CO2 as the principal anthropogenic greenhouse gas.
There is little doubt that the burning of fossil fuels to generate energy, which has been going on since the start of the Industrial Revolution, releases large quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Also, CO2 levels have been increasing steadily and are now estimated from ice core analysis to be some 35 percent higher than 200 years ago.
The problem with such seemingly serious assertions regarding CO2 is that, in spite of its increasing presence, it still remains just a trace gas in the atmosphere. As of November 2007, the CO2 concentration in Earth’s atmosphere was estimated at 0.0382% by volume, or 382 parts per million by volume.
Another problem is that natural production of CO2 from such sources as combustion of organic matter, natural decay of vegetation, volcanic emissions, and the natural respiration of all aerobic organisms dwarfs that produced by fossil fuel burning. The U.S. Department of Energy has released estimates that nearly 97% of total CO2 emissions would occur even if humans were not present on Earth and that, because of the overwhelming presence of water vapor, manmade CO2 causes less than 0.12% of Earth’s greenhouse effect. To attribute so much power to affect the earth’s climate to a man-made gas so minor in amount would appear to defy common sense.
Put another way, if accumulation of greenhouse gases has any impact on global warming, Department of Energy data indicates nearly 99.9% would have to be attributed to natural causes. Nevertheless, AGW proponents blame approximately 1/1000 of all produced planetary CO2 — this trace gas which, in its totality, comprises less than 4/10,000 of the atmosphere — as the principal cause of climate change because it provides the only way to link global warming to human activity.”
So to sum it up:
* CO2 is less than 4/10,000th of our atmosphere, or not even 4 parts per million
* man made CO2 is less than 0.001% of all greenhouse gases
* if man did not even exist on the planet, 97% of the rise in CO2 would STILL be occurring
So Phil, how do you arrive at your claim that CO2 is warming the earth?
Phil, are you willing to accept something that simple, then, as justification for everything that the Democrats propose? Is that analogy strong enough for you to submit to their totalitarian eco-agenda? Do the consequences for the American economy and standard of living perturb you at all?
Somehow, I just didn’t think ole’ Phil would grace us with an answer to our questions about his comments on this article…
*shrug*
Meh, He has not a leg to stand on.
With the event of the fantastic hydrogen cars I foresee another problem. Dont\’t these cars burn hydrogen and that process creates energy and in that process the production of water. I see million of these autos on the road saving us millions of dollars, but at the same time wetting our roads and wet pavement causes more accidents. And then too, the creation of all that new water will certainly raise water levels. Additionally, the oxygen taken from the atmosphere in that process will have to be increased, but the poor plants will not have new sources of co2 to replace the oxygen loss while burning the hydrogen which makes the car run. This I suppose is the downside to hydrogen cars. I won’t go into electric cars at this time.
Ron, I’m ordering a lobotomy for you. The Kool-Aid has apparently caused permanent brain damage.
These alarmists have all of their bases covered, don’t they? The thing is,the more they talk the more people realize how ridiculous they are. Eventually they have to lose all credibility with enough people that it will stop their agenda.
You said it. I think the AGW alarmists are counting on the MSM to avoid the truth, and for the people to forget all of this. Of course, we’re not about to let that happen.