We know that past winters were cold because of a lack of CO2, and current winters are cold because there is too much CO2. We also know that all weather is our fault and has our fingerprints all over it.
Given the incontrovertible evidence that evil humans made the weather cold (by making the earth hot) I was wondering how you tell the difference between -20C caused by CO2 and -20C caused by a lack of CO2. Do they make a thermometer which can tell the difference?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brenda-ekwurzel-phd/talking-about-global-warm_b_799634.html
someone forgot to tell ‘cold in winter’ that it is now ‘climate disruption’
and brenda forgot to mention that the extra co2 was responsible for the previously milder winters, as well as the current extreme ones.
I will not go to Huff-N-Puff to find the answer to that one. I am sure Brenda was probably using the CLB answer from some reputable location like Surrealclimate.
This person is appalled by the lack of understanding of basic science….
…and doesn’t understand it either, has to write Brenda to ‘splain it.
so what we have here is another numb-nuts that believes
i would be positive ‘brenda’ wrote the question as well!
Easy, Just start with the firmly believed supposition that the burning of fossil fuels just HAS to be causing something bad then it’s just a matter of manufacturing something “bad” to blame on this activity.
What do you tell a global warming believer who is freezing in record cold all across the Northern Hemisphere, and in worsening winters for four years in a row, but continues to believe the earth is warming?
I would tell him to go back to school, but they’re the ones that let us down to begin with……… http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/12/21/apnewsbreak-percent-pass-military-exam/
These are the ones believing in climate disruption.
If it’s too hot it’s global warming, if it’s too cold it’s global warming. Only when the weather is perfect, it is not global warming!
Sorry Andy:
They blame Global warming for that also and tell you that the weather is NOT perfect no matter what it feels like!
The increased precipitation in winter is considered the product of longer periods of open seas and lakes, plus an increased temperatue of the seas and lakes. The effect would therefore end when the seas are ice-covered and the lake surface temperatures drop to pre-AGW levels. Since we are talking only about a couple of weeks (I think), we should be able to correlate precipitation levels to ice-cover and lake temperatures. If the increased precipitation carries beyond that, then an increased atmospheric humidity and/or a DECREASE in temperatures (dropping below dewpoint) would be responsible.
I think global humidity levels have increased by 20% since 1988. That raises the dewpoint and increases the likelihood of precipitation. Does anyone know of graphs that could answer these possibilities?
Being able to discern the difference between the 2 types of Cold requires a person to be skilled in the ‘Art’ of Climate Science. To the True Believers this is not a problem, since the zealots seem to care little about actual, hard Science.
Simple. If the weather in question has a negative effect on humanity than it’s “Global Warming” otherwise not.
Unlike “Cold in Winter”, I am still waiting for some solid science. Nobody has explained how this “new” physical property of carbon dioxide, that makes it a “greenhouse” gas, actually works. Far as I know, CO2 is transparent to LWIR with the exception of two narrow absorption band at the extremes of LWIR.
Despite the artwork depicting the so called “well known greenhouse effect”, where is the science that disproves physicist Robert Wood’s famous experiment that falsified that theory? If it’s a misnomer, then what is the name of this theory?
Radiative Forcing? How is that different from positive feedback? Where is the negative feedback from increased cloud formation in the form of increased albedo? Does sunspot activity affect our climate? How?
We need better answers than we have now. Unfortunately, politicians and bureaucrats, ignorant as stumps, are passing and enforcing measures based on credentialed “I know” statements that are creating more harm than good.
Radiative Forcing (caused by CO2) causes the second law of thermodynamics to “flip-flop”, allowing heat to flow against a gradient (from cold to hot). I have taken advantage of this fact to develop an “RF Membrane” which continuously reverses the second law. The membrane can be used for heating in the winter and cooling in the summer; very inconvenient for big oil!
“Flip flop” the 2nd law of thermodynamics by a mechanism called “Radiative Forcing”? And now using “RF Membranes” that pumps heat using no external energy source? I can’t wait to try it out with my Stirling engine. How much do these membranes cost? I could use CO2 instead of hydrogen gas in the Stirling to double the power output due to its radiative forcing ability.
Heck with those deniers, I know this will work!
Perhaps its whether or not the CO2 is organic. I have a neighbor that tells me that power plant CO2 is bad and naturally occurring CO2 is organic and therefore good.
i despair.