Saturday, February 9, 2013

Climate Change Deniers Buried In NE Snowfall

Or by record Hurricane Sandy/tornado/drought/fire/flood damage.

Apologizes are in order.


Anonymous said...

You idiot; global warming is supposed to cause heat and drought, not cold and snow. Why do you think they call it global warming anyway??

Anonymous said...

So we must have a solution affordable to every nation. What's the answer?

Nuclear power?

Anonymous said...

Silly silly silly Madison Liberals, guess what, its just the weather.

I think Jame Rowen may be losing it said...

HA HA HA, it is winter. Now if it were 80 degrees and a drought, or if this blizzard happened in July, it might be a bit more unusual, but a blizzard in February, although noteworthy, is far from unprecedented.

Anonymous said...

So much for global warming -- stick that "hockey stick" where the sun don't shine if you think it is gettin' warmer.

Carbon taxes are a scam!

James Rowen said...

Global warming" does not appear in the post or headline.

Climate change results in extreme weather events.

Reagan's Disciple said...

Temperature rises, it's global warming.

Temperature falls, it's climate change.

Here is a news flash for you lefties, this is Earth, temperatures and climates do change, and they change all of the time.

Making up headlines every time a snowstorm or thunderstorm passes by further helps to further erode this hoax.

Even better, to debunk this myth further, according to news reports and meteorologists, this blizzard was on par or just below two other record northeast blizzards.

One of them was in 1978 and the other in 1888... ( I wonder if they had people screaming about climate change back then? I mean the horse manure and methane was probably causing havoc on our greenhouse gasses)

Perhaps it is time for you lefties to pray to your God Typhoeus and ask for forgiveness.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

But they said the ice was melting and that polar bears were going to be extinct.

Let's burn ALL THE CARBON WE CAN as quickly as possible to prove al gore wrong.

And if we are wrong, so what, extinction cannot be a bad thing -- much better than sham carbon taxes to steal money for a few corporate interest.

Betsey said...

James, you need to move your blog to where these nutjobs can't find you. It's tiresome to read the same old, same old ignorant denier drivel. That, or find some new commenters.

PS: Don't give anyone a helping hand out of an extreme snowdrift until they admit, in writing, that climate change is real and results in extreme weather events. Check IDs!

James Rowen said...

Betsey: The commenters do not bother me. I delete their libelous remarks, or comments that attack third parties from their anonymous hiding places.

I think some of these commenters are paid conservative operatives, perhaps even public or GOP officials who troll blogs via Google alerts.

Some on the Purple Wisconsin site have thousands of comments to their 'name.'

Betsey said...

You are St. Tolerance, dear sir.

Reagan's Disciple said...

Not me, just a regular ol' conservative out in the burbs.

No money, no recognition, not a thing to gain other than sticking to my beliefs.

In fact, I don't even know what or how to use Google alerts. I just have the site book marked and check it when it comes to mind.

But all of this talk about paid operatives etc.. is kind of exciting in a 007 kind of way.

Reagan's Disciple said...


You sound like a typical angry lefty, demanding something for helping someone else out.

I'd help anyone that I see stuck in snow regardless of their political beliefs.

It is the right thing to do. Aren't you on the side of "Tolerance" and "Coexist?" You certainly don't sound that way.

Do the right thing.

Anonymous said...

Reagan's disciple, I first read about the Greenhouse Effect in 1987, when I was just 12 years old.

I recall the article saying that although the effect would on average warm the earth, it would also cause a disruption of the Gulf Stream, which in turn would cause Europe to cool while the rest of the world would warm, and that there would be a lot more evaporation and precipitation (meaning more intense rain) but that it would stay mostly at sea, causing inland areas to suffer drought.

I was only 12, and none of that seemed hard to understand. And yet every time there's a mention of global warming on this blog, commenters come here and pretend that they lack the reading comprehension of a 12 year old.

Or maybe they are not pretending.

Doesn't it bother you that your fellow conservatives "debate" this issue by feigning the utmost stupidity?

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

Heh. I have left links showing the difference between WEATHER and CLIMATE before.

But the nonna-trolls are never willing to acknowledge the idea, because it makes their 'har-har it gets cold!' arguments nonsensical.

Also, I have affection for seeing that lonely link to that twisted and debunked site EVERY TIME this subject comes up.

I suspect JR is right, that at least some of teh Nonny Mouses are paid shills.

In fact, I don't even know what or how to use Google alerts.

Not really surprising. You have like four sources for most of your links, all of which are WILDLY ideological or roundly debunked.

Doesn't it bother you that your fellow conservatives "debate" this issue by feigning the utmost stupidity?

Of course, this issue is what caused Upton SInclair to say "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

In a related vein, H.L. Mencken said "The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.”

In that vein, I believe James may feel himself in vaunted company.

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

Doesn't it bother you that your fellow conservatives "debate" this issue by feigning the utmost stupidity?

Gosh, you just summed up most of RD's comments.

Of course, he has guns, so his argument wins.

Anonymous said...

Global warming causes greater concentrations of moisture. That's why we have "super storms" and that's why their number increases. Yes, global warming causes droughts. But what do you think happens to all that moisture the heat sucks up from the land, lakes, rivers, and ocean? It ends up in the atmosphere where it eventually becomes precipitation.

Global warming causes more of both extremes: droughts on one end, super storms and flooding on the other.

And nobody said because the earth is warming, that that would make all snow simply disappear. There is still plenty of cold air at the poles on Planet Earth. There's just less of it over time. Doesn't mean snow magically disappears. I mean cant you anonymous global warming-denier clowns do better than that?

Speaking of deniers, do you guys like the 42 degree and rainy weather in February? Did you already forget about the 90 degrees highs we had last March? If you live in Wisconsin, 42 in February with rain isn't standard Wisconsin temp. Do you like the drought that Wisconsin and the Great Plains states have been having? (Yes, even with all the precipitation we've been having, drought is still ongoing in Wisconsin. Funny, how the global warming-denier clowns forget that part.... Drought in Wisconsin in the winter after snow? Yup.

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

Of course, the February snowmelt will also fall on deaf deniers' ears.

I recall being a kid in Madison-adjacent, and three of us sons being called upon to shovel pretty much from November through to March. And the snow cover was pretty much continuous during those months.

Even when I moved to Milwaukee, around 1983, I remember that the snow was so deep that the sidewalk intersections were kind of carved out of the piles; and that you had to look out of the canyons for cars as you crossed.

That was thirty years ago. And now, we have a February snowcover being melted by a warming period and a rain.

Deniers keep pointing toward the changes of climate in the past. However, what they never acknowledge is that the changes we are experiences are within a single lifetime.

EVEN if we acknowledge that the change may not be anthropogenic (which I do not concede) the rapidity of change is such that it behooves the intelligent species (and it may be that Republicans are not part of that cohort, given their behavior) to make efforts to blunt and reduce the intensity of what is going on. Because it is apparent to all but the most ideologically blinkered that the crisis is going to occur and nothing we do is going to stop it.

Reagan's Discple said...

I first read about the Greenhouse Effect in 1987, when I was just 12 years old.

When I was that age I was listening to all of my educators warn me of the coming ice age.

I'm still waiting... oh wait, they changed the theory to fit their agenda.. Again!


I live in Wisconsin and quite honestly, I hope that we do get warmer weather. The real debate is whether or not it is man-caused.

My opinion is that Mother Earth and the solar events of our sun have a better handle on this than some guy running his lawn mower when it is 90^ and humid.

Reagan's Discple said...

I recall being a kid in Madison-adjacent,

I guess that statement explains everything about you.

Betsey said...

Dear Mr. Reagan's Disciple,

You misconstrue me, I think, on purpose!

I would never advocate for anyone to ignore a fellow being in distress, regardless of beliefs, which isn't likely to arise as a subject for discussion in the middle of securing the safety of the person in trouble. I was speaking tongue-in-cheek to James, whom I know would never leave a fellow human being stranded either.

I was merely having a bit of fun, at no one's expense, mind you, with the thought that James might cruise around in extreme weather events, affidavits and pen in hand, looking for climate change deniers caught in snow drifts. Though this blog is a quasi-public forum, it is still a conversation, and I ask you to please note that my comments were directed to James, not to you.

I was also playing with James' headline which reads, "Climate Change Deniers Buried in NE Snowfall". Really! I'm sorry I have to explain this in detail to you. Or perhaps you have such a jaded view of life and people that it's simple for you to attribute your anger and motivation to others. I believe in psychological circles this is called "projection."

Furthermore, I've noticed that you and several others (I can't tell them apart when they're all called Anonymous) seem to have disproportionate reactions to the mention of climate change and global warming. It's also apparent that James and most followers of his blog generally seem to agree with this theory and that recent extreme weather events are at least possibly manifestations of its truth. We all know what you think about it thanks to your frequent comments repeating your verities in much the same language each time.

Perhaps you'd be happier following another blog where the nuances of your theory can be discussed to your heart's delight, and the idea that it may not be so would not upset you. Or better yet, begin your own blog where you and others can share data and refine theories to support your conclusions. Constant stress shortens one's life, and I wouldn't want you to live anything but a long and productive one.

Max B said...

Information evolves, people evolve in their understanding.

Except for some who want to hold their 5th grade teachers responsible some 40 years later.

Anonymous said...

"When I was that age I was listening to all of my educators warn me of the coming ice age."

So you are at least somewhat embarrased, which is why you are changing the subject.

You see right here in this very thread conservatives feigning stupidity, and pretending that the Greenhouse Effect does nothing but cause heat and drought, when you know that 25 years ago already there was discussion of more complex consequences.

And since you can't address the topic, you try to change it.

I live in Wisconsin and quite honestly, I hope that we do get warmer weather."

You obviously are not a farmer. You obviously have no clue whatsoever just what it takes for this country to keep you comfortably settled in the lifestyle to which you are accustomed.

You are part of the reason why in this day and age, "republican" is a term of abuse in engineering schools.

Reagan's Discple said...

You are part of the reason why in this day and age, "republican" is a term of abuse in engineering schools.

Yet we control every branch of Wisconsin Government... go figure.

BTW - Have you ever conversed with an engineer. Talk about being socially awkward... and yes, that is a stereotype.

zombie rotten mcdonald said...

BTW - Have you ever conversed with an engineer. Talk about being socially awkward... and yes, that is a stereotype.

It certainly is. And like most steretoypes, is far from true.

As I have mentioned, I volunteer with FIRST Robotics; most of the mentors are engineers of various types. And professionally, I work with engineers also.

Sure, some of them are not suave and debonair. But some are. And nearly all of them are quite good at getting their point across. And some of them are even friendly.

I don't know what the point of your comment was, except to discount Anon's snark by belittling engineers.

I converse with engineers every day. More; I am married to one. And I assure you that they, just like most granfalloons you might point to, encompass pretty much the entire spectrum of human behavior.

Anonymous said...

Yet we control every branch of Wisconsin Government... go figure.

The vast majority of people cannot set the time on their long discarded proverbial VCRs. Losing the respect of engineers won't mean losing elections.

It will mean running the country into the ground when you win.

The GOP's decision to adopt identity politics and take the wrong side of every issue where science is important, is why nowadays "republican" is a derogatory word on the MIT campus.

It goes beyond climate change. In regards to the mining laws here, the GOP has decided to try to exclude comment from the Army Corps of Engineers, a very telling action.

In regards to transportation policy, the GOP, in the name of identity politics, has insisted on continuing to build the most financially unsustainable form of infrastructure, and then refuse to finance it.

Visit MIT. Or Caltech. Or Marquette's school of engineering. Those places used to be republican-friendly. Not anymore.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the supposed claims of "ice age," it's a bunch of BS to claim your educators were talking about that in 1987.


The whole claims about a supposed "ice age" go back to the early '70s when Newsweek did an article and featured it on the front cover. But an analysis of actual scientific and scholarly papers from the early '70s shows that the scientific community has been in consensus even since then: scientific papers even back then were in consensus that the globe was warming because of fossil fuel use. The whole claim that we've been supposedly vacillating between claims of warming and cooling is false: the scientific community has always been in consensus and claimed that extra CO2 leads to warming .