Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by equinox on February 21, 2010 at 11:05am

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.

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on March 8, 2010 at 6:04pm

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.

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/02/17/no-ipcc-climatologis...

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."

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on March 8, 2010 at 5:59pm

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?