Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
- Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Did Bill Gates Do This?
- Worst March Drought On Record In The US
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
Recent Comments
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Gordon Vigurs on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Jack the Insider on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
CSM : Study Links Global Warming To Snow, But Does Not Show A Link Between Global Warming And Snow
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.


It’s a shame I’m not in a climate related field (or university course); I’d like to be funded to study something already well established in human knowledge.
I’m just perplexed that csmonitor consider this as being something new; it is basic high school science.
Here’s another funny quote from the article…….”In some ways, he suggests, the study’s main value may rest in the model shortcomings it may reveal – shortcomings “that may limit our current ability” to provide credible evidence of a link between global warming and the extreme rain and snowfall.”
Really?
An example of poor journalism……..”Either something is wrong with the models and they’re not getting the magnitude of the extremes observed,” Dr. Held says, identifying global warming as a culprit “may be suspect because something is going on” in the climate system that the models aren’t capturing.”
There is a word missing from that quote. Indeed, at the very minimum an entire clause. Is it wrong to hate warmistas that intentionally leave out information?
To answer my own question, “hate the sin, but” blather, bs, blather, bs, blather, “sinner”.
En la mañana.
This is what I call intelligent reporting…. for morons.
The study released after the fact to let you know they were smart enough to know ahead of time it could be caused by manmade global warming.
;O)
Huge surprise, wait for them to start denying they ever said CAGW will cause droughts.