The Pueblo Leader – Jan 28, 1913
Wind chills in Canada are currently -60ºF.
Canada Weather Map – Current Wind Chill of Canada – Find Local Weather
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- arn on HUD Climate Advisor
- spren on HUD Climate Advisor
- conrad ziefle on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Tel on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Petit_Barde on Ellen Flees To The UK
- dm on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Gamecock on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on The End Of Polar Bears
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Richard E Fritz on Scientist Kamala Harris
The temperature increase sounds like current projections. So, climate science’s ability to project temperatures hasn’t changed much in a century despite having much better computational assistance than Arrhenius?
1913 …. 2013 …… Same hysteri, same predictions of DOOM….
Today there is an agenda behind the “science” … It’s Progressive, Socialist, anti-people, ain’t low cost energy, all under the Guise of a Global Warming Apocalypse… Just as was said back in 1913 and even centuries before by Darwin, etc… Folks who recognized a CYCLE…
Exactly, Phil. The thing is that it’s not possible to disentangle the politics from the supposed science.
Even way before the global warming scare had gained any noteworthy recognition among scientists and politicos, as in the early ’70s, leftist politicians and leftist scientists were already spewing as desirable the anti-energy and de-industrialization proposals that now masquerade “coincidentally” as the solution to the global warming “problem.” For example, John Holdren, Obama’s current Science Czar, said way back in 1973 that we must “de-develop the United States… and create a low consumption economy.” It wasn’t global warming that drove Holdren to say that then, but now it’s global warming that supposedly moves to Holdren to say exactly the same thing. Truth is that Holdren obviously thought that de-development was the right thing to do for it’s own sake, despite the untold misery and huge reductions in quality of life that such an extreme path would cause. And we have leftist politicians like the senator Tim Wirth in 1993 joining in, saying: “We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing.”
And today, many leftist warmist pundits continue to insist that even if they are wrong on their theory, that what they propose what would “make the world better anyway.” No. WRONG. Take the absurdly high 83% CO2 cuts mandated in the 2009 cap & trade bill that passed the U.S. House (but the bill didn’t make it to Obama, fortunately). That bill would have take an apocalyptic wrecking ball to the economy and civil society. It wouldn’t have made “a better world.”
The scientists have been told to lie, starting with lead ipcc author Stephen Schneider in 1989 (“We have to offer up scary scenarios… each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective [lying] and being honest [ineffective]”). Over and over again the warmist scientists have idiotically expressed the view publically that it’s good to deceive the public in order to advance “the cause” (Mann). There is just no way you can say that the “science” advanced by the suspect climate scientists, who have been told point blank that they should not be honest, there is no way that science can be given ANY credibility. It is corrupted, tainted, worthless. Climate science is a crock. As a matter of fact any poll of the alleged consensus among scientists on climate change needs to exclude (post 1990 vintage) climate scientists because they cannot be considered politically unbiased or impartial.
Something I’ve never been able to understand about the greenhouse theory is how heat from sunlight can enter the earth’s atmosphere through CO2 but not escape through CO2.
Any rational thinking person would conclude an equal amount of heat would reflect back into space as would be trapped in the Earth’s atmosphere by CO2.
The satellite data shows six times more heat is escaping the Earth than IPCC models show. (Lindzen and Choi)
The thought is that CO2 interacts more directly with LW IR radiation, and this is what the warmed earth radiates.
I remember when the global warmers were telling us here that southern Ontario would be as warm as Florida in the winter. We are now experiencing one of the coldest winters in some time. On my natural gas bill from November 11, 2013 to December 9, 2013. the avearage temperature was 0 C. Last year, the temperature averaged 4 C for about the same period. I live in Cayuga, south of Hamilton. This morning it was -12 C. Barrie was -15 C and North Bay was -29C. Gjoa Haven in the Arctic was -36 C. Some haven.
Those temperatures are yet to be adjusted. You’ll feel much warmer once they are adjusted upwards by 10 to 20 degrees. 😀
Perth 29 deg C
-13 F here this morning. UP of Michigan
Thankfully I live in the green part in the lower left corner of Canada.
The “left coast”!!
I’m not a climatologist so I just have to ask: How is slightly warmer Canadian weather a bad thing; what’s more a catastrophically bad thing?
I’m from the Southwestern US, but “been all-over” and one of those places was Montreal, Canada summer of 1985 on military leave. Didn’t know I was going to have a chance to go there so I hadn’t done any research on it and didn’t know what to expect. Oh what a beautiful city! I still have a poster from that visit, (the jazz festival) hanging in my front entry room of my house.
If only AGW had a shred of truth, Montreal would be getting nice and warm by now!
http://www.worldweatheronline.com/Montreal-weather-averages/Quebec/CA.aspx
Still planning a visit back some day. It will be in August!
Not Antarctica then, as predicted by UK Government scientist David King?
http://web.archive.org/web/20100817023019/http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/why-antarctica-will-soon-be-the-ionlyi-place-to-live–literally-561947.html
As far as I can tell, humans do a pretty fair job of surviving in temperatures up to 135°. With a little technology, I’m sure we could push that over 160°. That would only require a bit more than 12× the highest predicted warming over the next century for Kansas to become unlivable.
He spoke too soon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lakes_Storm_of_1913
“The Great Lakes Storm of 1913, historically referred to as the “Big Blow”, the “Freshwater Fury”, or the “White Hurricane”, was a blizzard with hurricane-force winds that devastated the Great Lakes Basin in the Midwestern United States and the Canadian province of Ontario from November 7 through November 10, 1913.
The deadliest and most destructive natural disaster ever to hit the lakes,[1] the Great Lakes Storm killed more than 250 people, destroyed 19 ships, and stranded 19 others. The financial loss in vessels alone was nearly US $5 million (or about $119,310,000 in today’s dollars).”