Is this another case of hard sell of global warming?

Question

Snow in Greece

http://www.ana.gr/anaweb/user/showplain?maindoc=6157497&maindocimg=6154941&service=6

Les we forget the snow in Israel.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1203343699258&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Waking up to 1 this morning.

How much colder does it have to get before people keep talking about how much warmer it is through out the history of this world and we are all doomed?

Answer 1

global warming wont stop snow. if you turn your freezer down a degree or two chances are there will be exactly the same amount ice in your freezer as before. its the same with global warming.

also global warming just means that on average global temps are going up. it dose not necessarily mean that everywhere will warm evenly or Even warm at all.

Answer 2

In theory, the melting of the ice caps puts more water into the oceans, disrupting the flow of the ocean currents. Those currents carry warmth to the northern area. I have no idea how it works.

Answer 3

All the enviro fascists have is theories.

They will insult your intelligence and in their minds render your opinion moot.

Answer 4

There has been snow in Israel before...

They say the earth is warming by "almost" 1 degree. Oh dear! Wait, let's think rationally. Turn the cold down one degree in your freezer. How much faster is it going to melt things, exactly? It won't, if it started at a cold temperature. Thinking rationally, global warming doesn't work.

I went outside the other day, and it was below zero. I live in Ohio. I yelled, "Dang, I ain't pollutin' enough! Somebody throw some cans out here!"

Answer 5

Increased snowfall in some regions is an expected result of global warming.  I discuss why here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Not that I expect you to actually click the link, because it's pretty clear your mind is made up and this is an insincere question.

Also, studies of peer-reviewed research have shown that there is virtually none rejecting the consensus on anthropogenic global warming:

http://www.norvig.com/oreskes.html

Answer 6

The 'AGW Society' has and will continue to explain any and all weather phenomena as being the result of AGW.  They no longer see ANY weather as 'normal'.  

The Media and the 'research-grant-sucking' machine have done a masterful job of duping many of the civilian masses.

Fortunately, their scam is being exposed with each passing day.

Answer 7

No hard sell is necessary in the case of science supporting global warming:

http://norvig.com/oreskes.html

The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search [global climate change] at the ISI Web of Science. Of these, according to Oreskes, 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus.

Yes we do know that global warming has been a serious issue in the past, causing major extinctions on the planet millions of years ago, also due to CO2 emissions:

http://www.killerinourmidst.com/P-T%20bo...

"An even larger amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) would also have been expelled by Traps volcanism. But in contrast to the sulfate aerosols, carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for extended periods of time (centuries), though it decreases slowly over that interval. As a greenhouse gas, it warms the atmosphere, changing ecological conditions. (Deccan Traps volcanism, coming before the end of the Cretaceous, is estimated to have warmed the world by 3° to 5°C, or 5.4° to 9°F; Ravizza and Peucker-Ehrenbrink, 2003.) And because it combines chemically to form carbonic acid, it also produces mildly acidic rain. Acid rain can dissolve calcium carbonate shells, particularly those at or near the ocean surface.  Additionally, acid rain leaches vital nutrients from the soil, resulting in plant stunting and death."

So how does the prospect of mass extinctions, well documented as occurring in the past at the same temperatures forecasted for us now in less than 100 years, seem reassuring to you?

The progression in scientific understanding on the current global warming is summarized in detail on this site:

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.h...

Scientists would love to find evidence that we are off the hook, but there is no alternate theory that has any widespread support, becaue the evidence does not point in any reassuring directions.

Many people believe that global warming is a myth because there is a very sophisticated effort underway to convince people of that.  It is very similar to the campaign used by the tobacco industry:

http://www.nowpublic.com/whos_paid_to_de...

ExxonMobil is one of the well documented funding sources for these denial efforts:

Exxposing ExxonMobil's Agenda: Manipulating Politics and the Public

http://www.exxposeexxon.com/facts/dailyf...

So if there's a "hard sell" going on, it's the propaganda being manufactured by ExxonMobil and others to delay action, just like the tobacco companies denied the link between smoking and cancer.

I don't understand your point about snow however.  What do you claim that weather has to do with global warming?  How would one degree of climate change affect normal extreme weather variations, including whether or not it snows during a given storm?  Clearly it would only affect the small percentage of storms that occur right on the freezing point, and few of them would occur exactly at that temperature.

The fact that the Northern Hemisphere is temporarily in a strong La Nina cool weather cycle does nothing to disprove or slow the underlying trend of gradual but devastating global warming.

Answer 8

dont worry, you are right.  The earth is billions of years old yet we can spot a trend from 100 years of data concluding that we are all doomed and the planet will be changed forever....

But NOTHING IS HAPPENING.  Everything seems the same way it always has been.

The peer review process involved with the IPCC is complete c**p.  I read a lot about how they reviewed the IPCC's reports before their release and it is an insult to the scientific world.

Read this

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/sppi_o...

And for you proponents, its source doesnt make it any less true.  They did NOT follow the traditional peer review process because the IPCC has an agenda, it IS NOT a scientific community, it is a political community.

Answer 9

Don't let your ignorance of how climate behaves get in the way. Are you just spouting this info,or are you a trained scientist with an informed opinion? What makes you think that cold temps will never happen because of AGW? Is there a 'peer reviewed' research paper on this topic? You're armed with a single thermometer,and now your an expert on climate change! Wow! I'm going to nominate you to get a Nobel Peace Prize, just like Al's!