global warming

You are currently browsing the archive for the global warming category.

Best – warming – headline – evah | Watts Up With That?

They’ve revised the story at this link by now, but the beauty of the Internet is that it never forgets.

or, “Shouldn’t any competent climatologist be able to answer this question?”

Science Quiz | Daily Pundit:

(read it all!)

Global is supposed to mean world-wide, as in a “global catastrophe.”A global phenomenon should affect everyone, everywhere.

For the past two weeks, the average high temp in Nashville has been 45. Historically, our average high temp in February is 55. For the next week, the average high temp is forecast to be approx. 45 each day. This is not just a one fluke day anomaly. We’re running a month of consecutive days where our temps are 10 degrees below normal.

In layman’s terms, it’s cold.

But the AGW true believers are quick to assert that this in no way refutes the documented long-term trend of global warming. The models, they assure, in fact predict that there will be more extreme weather, more snow, more record cold days. Right.

I am reminded of John Wisdom’s parable of the invisible gardener, which runs thus:

“Two people return to their long neglected garden and find, among the weeds, that a few of the old plants are surprisingly vigorous. One says to the other, ‘It must be that a gardener has been coming and doing something about these weeds.’ The other disagrees and an argument ensues. They pitch their tents and set a watch. No gardener is ever seen. The believer wonders if there is an invisible gardener, so they patrol with bloodhounds but the bloodhounds never give a cry. Yet the believer remains unconvinced, and insists that the gardener is invisible, has no scent and gives no sound. The sceptic doesn’t agree, and asks how a so-called invisible, intangible, elusive gardener differ from an imaginary gardener, or even no gardener at all.”

And so, I ask the AGW true believers, How does this invisible, intangible, elusive global warming which produces cold weather and more snow differ from imaginary global warming, or even, no global warming at all?

Tags: ,

With 40+ inches of global warming on the ground in the Washington DC area, defenders of global warming have been scrambling to deflect or rebut the taunting of the skeptics. Contessa Brewer of CNN, attempting to swim in waters way over her head, made the assertion online that the large snowfalls on the East Coast don’t refute global warming, because warm air carries more moisture. The heavier snowfalls, according to the dear Contessa, are actually BECAUSE of global warming – because warm air carries more moisture.

While technically this assertion is true, it doesn’t help the defenders of global warming one inch! If the syllogism “global warming -> more moisture -> more snowfall” were true, then we ought to see more total inches of precipitation in the DC area, right?

Let’s go to the numbers, Johnny.

Over the past 30 years, the average precipitation for the month of January at Washington Reagan Airport has been 2.72 inches.

Total precipitation for January of 2010? 1.37 inches.

Average precipitation for the month of February? 2.71 inches

Precip so far for February of 2010? 1.79 inches.

Yep, from these stats its clear to see that the warmer air caused by global warming has been carrying more moisture and that this has been causing the large snowfall amounts in DC.

Wait.. No, that’s not right… Something…

Never mind.

Perhaps Contessa Brewer should get out an elementary science book and remind herself of this simple science fact. When it’s warm the moisture in the air comes down as RAIN. When it’s cold, the moisture in the air comes down as SNOW.

Is there any difference in the amount of moisture / precipitation in DC this year vs the past 30 years. NO!

There. Is. No. Increase. In. The. Amount. of. Moisture!.

The only difference is that it’s COLDER.

Which leads me to a prediction. It’s only a matter of time before Contessa informs us that Gobal Warming is causing it to be COLDER.