From the Annals of Sno-Cone Science

There's a vintage Bob and Ray radio sketch in which Bob plays "Mr. Science," a parody of TV's "Mr. Wizard." He's trying to explain to his young protégé Sandy "the miracle of gas refrigeration."

"Doesn't it seem paradoxical to you that a refrigerator is made cold by a flame?" Mr. Science asks.


Sandy exclaims, "Holy cats! Wait 'til I tell the gang at school that! I thought it was made cold by the ice cubes, Mr. Science!"

Sandy's slippery grasp of physics and Mr. Science's increasingly convoluted explanations characterize the debate over climate change that was taking place in Washington and the media this week. As the capital and much of the Eastern seaboard were digging themselves out from two big snow events, climate change deniers were pointing to the frozen tundra on the Potomac as evidence that global warming is a fraud.


Read the rest here.




Tags: climate change, denial, environment, politics, weather

Views: 8

Replies to This Discussion

This article doesn't really say much does it?

This sentence seems out of touch with the current debate:
Granted, debating global warming while stuck in a snowdrift can seem a little counterintuitive, especially if you tend to willfully deny scientific evidence and prefer to limit your knowledge of the cold to such things as sticking your tongue on the schoolyard flagpole and enjoying the occasional Sno-Cone.

Some of the science behind IPCC AR4 keeps getting corrected after it's publication.

This article fails to mention the many warmists who predicted snowfall would end especially near this decade...the blade of the hockey stick.

I think it is interesting that our intel agencies see something worthwhile in preparing for the cyclical climate change that seems to always have existed on/around this earth. All part of the art of war...survival.
Some of the science behind IPCC AR4 keeps getting corrected after it's publication.

Science does get corrected. It's called the "Scientific Method." Counter to the "God did it, the end" absolute-answer method, Scientific Method takes available information, reviewed by many people from many different angles, comes up with the best going theory, and remains open for alteration as new information pours in.

That said, the corrections to the IPCC report that have the Religious Right salivating with glee are not coming from the climate-science end of the report, but the sociological, how-we-think-humankind-will-react end of the report.

As for predictions that "Snowfall will end" (Everywhere, globally I presume, since you don't qualify by saying where snowfall will end), I've never seen that. Honestly, I've never seen a prediction of the end of snowfall locally by this decade. Please, show me the report. I'd love to see who is saying that and if that who is a credible, peer-reviewed source or the Woody Harrelson character from "2012."
I.E. The details of Climate Change and AGW are many and complex. Too complex for the uneducated mind to wrap around.

Example ... the inability of some individuals or all of FAUX News to understand the difference between Local Weather vs. Global Climate.

It's cloudy and snowing here in Flagstaff this afternoon. Does that mean Flagstaff is always cloudy and always snowing?


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon


Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service