Cold? It might be even colder if not for global warming
Cold enough for you?
The temperature today isn’t predicted to rise above freezing, and the low tonight is supposed to be a frigid 18 degrees. In other words, the weather gives us a perfect opportunity to talk a little more about the realities of global warming.
For starters, this isn’t really very cold. Atlanta’s record low for today, Jan. 5, was 3 degrees, set back in 1884; the record low for tomorrow, Jan. 6, was minus 1, also set in 1884. That’s cold. Compared to those temperatures, today is practically balmy.
In fact, winter weather here in Atlanta has been getting warmer and warmer. Over the past 15 years, according to Weather Channel data, we’ve set seven record highs for January. We have set no record lows.
I made a similar point in a column last month, noting that 24 out of the 31 daily record highs for December had been set just in the last 25 years, while we set only 3 record lows in that time frame.
In that column, I also warned against the fallacy of trying to draw larger conclusions from temperatures in just one location, such as Atlanta. But as it turns out, scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado had noticed the same phenomenon but on a national scale:
BOULDER—Spurred by a warming climate, daily record high temperatures occurred twice as often as record lows over the last decade across the continental United States, new research shows. The ratio of record highs to lows is likely to increase dramatically in coming decades if emissions of greenhouse gases continue to climb.
“Climate change is making itself felt in terms of day-to-day weather in the United States,” says Gerald Meehl, the lead author and a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). “The ways these records are being broken show how our climate is already shifting.”
The study, by authors at NCAR, Climate Central, The Weather Channel, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has been accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters. It was funded by the National Science Foundation, NCAR’s sponsor, the Department of Energy, and Climate Central.
If temperatures were not warming, the number of record daily highs and lows being set each year would be approximately even. Instead, for the period from January 1, 2000, to September 30, 2009, the continental United States set 291,237 record highs and 142,420 record lows, as the country experienced unusually mild winter weather and intense summer heat waves….
“If the climate weren’t changing, you would expect the number of temperature records to diminish significantly over time,” says Claudia Tebaldi, a statistician with Climate Central who is one of the paper’s co-authors. “As you measure the high and low daily temperatures each year, it normally becomes more difficult to break a record after a number of years. But as the average temperatures continue to rise this century, we will keep setting more record highs.”
This graphic shows the ratio of record daily highs to record daily lows observed at about 1,800 weather stations in the 48 contiguous United States from January 1950 through September 2009. Each bar shows the proportion of record highs (red) to record lows (blue) for each decade. The 1960s and 1970s saw slightly more record daily lows than highs, but in the last 30 years record highs have increasingly predominated, with the ratio now about two-to-one for the 48 states as a whole.
Climate is an average taken over time, just as a baseball batting average is measured over time. In both cases, you’re still going to get day-to-day fluctuations. Ted Williams was a great hitter, the last man to hit .400 over a season, but even he went 0 for 5 pretty often. He just had fewer of those cold hitting spells than poor hitters did.
Likewise, even in a warming climate, you’re going to get the occasional cold spell, which is what we’re seeing today. You still get variations of heat and cold. But if the planet is indeed warming, you would expect to get fewer and fewer record lows over time, and more and more record highs.
That is exactly the pattern we’re seeing.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
288 comments Add your comment
Gale
January 5th, 2010
3:31 pm
LHS and Jake, while I don’t agree with Jake, I have to confess that I’ve had similar thoughts over the years. No, I don’t think it is a solution anyone can or should act on. And I don’t focus on any ethnic group as being the root cause of any problem. My fantasy starts with emptying the maximum security prisons, as in terminating those individuals, not freeing them. Then I would do the same with institutions for the criminally insane. Mind, this would be world wide, not just in the US. After that, Just start roaming the streets. People who are just a drag on society, drug dealers, etc.
But, do you know what, within a few years we would be right back where we were. Humans come in all flavors and some of us are not nice people. So, it would be a poor solution. Still, I can’t help but think clearing the justice system of the unredeemable would be a healthy start.
Outhouse Go-Kart
January 5th, 2010
3:33 pm
No…you are illogical and blinded. Good luck with all of that.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
3:34 pm
The Cap and Trade Success Story
“Cap and trade” harnesses the forces of markets to achieve cost-effective environmental protection. Markets can achieve superior environmental protection by giving businesses both flexibility and a direct financial incentive to find faster, cheaper and more innovative ways to reduce pollution.
Cap and trade was designed, tested and proven here in the United States, as a program within the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The success of this program led The Economist magazine to crown it “probably the greatest green success story of the past decade.” (July 6, 2002).
The following points highlight some real world results of that program:
http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1085
it’ll never work….ooops already did!
Outhouse Go-Kart
January 5th, 2010
3:34 pm
However Mati…keep following the kenyan right over the cliff.
Jay
January 5th, 2010
3:34 pm
Hillbilly, I tried to find that answer myself in preparing the piece. Clearly, I failed. One gauge of how often it happens is Joe DiMaggio’s legendary hitting streak. He went 56 consecutive games without going hitless, which is considered a remarkable, almost untouchable feat. So an 0-fer-4 or 0-fer-5 night must come fairly often even for the best.
Outhouse Go-Kart
January 5th, 2010
3:36 pm
Speaking of the kenyan…when do the new and improved unemployment numbers come out? tee hee!
Jake
January 5th, 2010
3:40 pm
Lord – There are classes that will improve your reading comprehension, try one. Oh and try a moral and ethical philosphy course as well, it will broaden that narrow christian ethic you appear to have. I wrote that it would be a solution to the jihadist problem. BTW, answer a question and quit repeating the same old riff about me. I’m asking you if killing someone that is trying to kill you is moral or immoral. And here’s another one, did that piece of scum currently held in that totally immoral Gitmo, the one generally believed to have beheaded Daniel Pearl, believe that beheading was moral or immoral?
Bud Wiser
January 5th, 2010
3:44 pm
Jay
January 5th, 2010
1:31 pm
Further enlightenment, Robert, from the NCAR site:
“The study team analyzed several million daily high and low temperature readings taken over the span of six decades at about 1,800 weather stations across the country, thereby ensuring ample data for statistically significant results….
Wow.
Now that is a hell of a baseline for statistical averages, sixty years out of, oh, six billion or so?
So when does Miss Mary dismiss K-2 from class, Jay?
My point, for the morons here, is that even six, sixty, or six hundred years is meaningless to run a climatological ’statistic’ that proves anything.
The warmers say they can read the rings of fossilized trees to determine temps and water from thousands, nay, millions of years ago. More like tea leaves.
Just remember that these are the same warmers that predicted a flurry of catastrophic hurricanes this season past, and how many were there…..uh…..still counting…..oh, none.
Anything to get on TV, on “the View”, on Oprah, whatever, just keep those dollars rolling in to Green Al Gore, and he will take our hand to the promised land of trees, flowers, nuts and berries. Just don’t get caught in that nasty hot blast from his private jet, the one that left about the same total carbon footprint for 3 months from any nation in Africa, with his 2 transatlantic crossings.
How do you people even have the brain power to wake up in the morning?
Of course, a few here do not – ”
Midori
January 5th, 2010
1:16 pm
Jay,
why in the world do you even attempt to discuss science and common sense with these knuckle draggers???
They’d rather roll around in their own feces before agreeing with science.
So January marks your annual apartment cleaning, eh?
Jake
January 5th, 2010
3:45 pm
Mrs. G – Kyoto was designed to reduce greehhouse gas emissions and I suppose that’s a success too except greenhouse gas emissions are like way up since it was signed. Even under the wildly improbably scenario where the world’s worst carbon emitter, China, joins the US, Japan, and the europeans and severely restricts emissions (not the 4% O went to Copenhagen with), econ 101 tells us that would just make coal and oil cheaper so the third world would just burn more of it. Oh and tranferring trillions to those countries would just feed their corrupt governments, it wouldn’t stop the mud people from buring charcoal and coal.
Lord Help Us
January 5th, 2010
3:46 pm
Jake, you are unfortunately making assumptions that are as clueless as your solution to the problem of terrorism…
However, be that as it may, I keep a loaded handcannon (with permit) in the truck and at home just in case some a-hole causes me to defend myself. That answer your question?
That ‘piece of scum’ at Gitmo that beheaded Daniel Pearl is very much like you, IMHO…he believes the world would be a better place without Christians.
Peas in a pod…you two…
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
3:49 pm
Jake
Cap and Trade worked.
Robert
January 5th, 2010
3:50 pm
Mrs. Godzilla, this scheme is ripe for fraud…not much different than the business Enron was in.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=ayqJJd6EU1Rk
By Heather Smith
Dec. 11 (Bloomberg) — “France opened a criminal investigation of four men allegedly involved in a 156 million- euro ($230 million) carbon trading fraud, the Paris prosecutors’ office said today.”
Also, the French supreme court just recently rejected France’s proposed carbon tax. Even the liberal French have shown some common sense.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
3:50 pm
LHU
Peas in a pod……Amen!
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
3:51 pm
Robert
Cap and Trade worked.
Hillbilly Deluxe
January 5th, 2010
3:52 pm
Jay,
It’s not a big deal, it just got me curious. As a die-hard baseball fan, I’m sure there would have been a number of 0′fer games. That’s why I love baseball, it rewards consistency and perserverance. Even Ty Cobb made outs at a better than 6 out of 10 clip. Thanks for taking the time to drop in and comment, too.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
3:52 pm
Robert
Ripe with fraud? It happens.
Contractors…….
Jake
January 5th, 2010
3:56 pm
Mrs. G – Besides being from a ’slightly’ biased sight, the environmental defense fund, you’re talking about a nationwide policy for acid rain compared to a global policy. As I indicated, the US and eors and a few others might restrict emisssions but that’s just gonna make coal and oil cheaper for the rest of the world.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
3:57 pm
From a Theory to a Consensus on Emissions
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: May 16, 2009
WASHINGTON — As Congress weighs imposing a mandatory limit on climate-altering gases — an outcome still far from certain — it is likely to turn to a system that sets a government ceiling on total emissions and allows polluting industries to buy and sell permits to meet it.
That approach, known as cap and trade, has been embraced by President Obama, Democratic leaders in Congress, mainstream environmental groups and a growing number of business interests, including energy-consuming industries like autos, steel and aluminum.
But not long ago, many of today’s supporters dismissed the idea of tradable emissions permits as an industry-inspired Republican scheme to avoid the real costs of cutting air pollution. The right answer, they said, was strict government regulation, state-of-the-art technology and a federal tax on every ton of harmful emissions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/us/politics/17cap.html
GreenJeans
January 5th, 2010
3:57 pm
Outhouse @ 3:07:
As a kid, I used to hunt for sharks’ teethe in the hilly terrain southwest of Dallas proper. In Guatemala, I meditated in jungle-covered, long-abandoned ruins and have come to believe that some mysteries just are.
I don’t get all hot and bothered over whether or not climate, ecosystems, or cultures change. Only a fool would deny that they do.
My only concern is moving forward and adapting along the way. And thanks to scientific (and other) discoveries, we are able to help make better decisions. So why wouldn’t we?
Incidentally, on a recent episode of PBS’ excellent “America’s Heartland” series, they explored the return to no-till farming…better for the environment, better for soil enrichment, and it cuts seeding costs by 2/3. Progressively Old School, I think!
My opinion, as you graciously allowed, is that all options are on the table, and we take whatever solution or combination of solutions serves us and our children the best.
As far as trusting the government, I apply the same philosophy that I would with any other employee: If they can’t be trusted, fire ‘em and re-hire.
thomas
January 5th, 2010
3:58 pm
Robert fraud is only an issue if it evolves from a republican idea! Ideas of democrat breeding are to be given rope in the case of fraud.
Robert
January 5th, 2010
3:58 pm
Mrs. Godzilla, Cap and Trade does not work.
http://www.heritage.org/research/EnergyandEnvironment/tst071009a.cfm
“…There are reasons that may explain this seemingly counterintuitive result that cap and trade is not only the wrong approach for the economy but is also the wrong approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Any sensible approach to global warming has to center on technological innovation as it applies to energy production and use. Breakthroughs such as ways to produce energy economically with low or no carbon dioxide emissions or improvements in energy efficiency make good sense irrespective of global warming.[8]
Innovation is what we really want. And we know from long experience that free economies innovate better than centrally planned ones. But cap and trade introduces a significant element of central planning and thus stifles innovation. We also know that strong economies innovate better than weak ones, but cap and trade weakens economies.”
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
3:59 pm
Jake
you could be right about who does the right thing and who doesn’t.
but it still means we do the right thing.
(mommy, mommy, little bruce gets wingdings and soda pop in his lunch….why do i have to eat a tuna sammich and an orange)
Jake
January 5th, 2010
4:01 pm
Lord – I don’t think christianity is mearly as flawed as Islam. However, I don’t favor people making important decisions that will effect my life based on their religious beliefs. I prefer reason and logic to mysticism when it comes to making decisions. Sorry you are so morally weak and flawed you can’t even answer a simple morality question but that’s where the illogic of christianity will leave you. Just fyi, I don’t lie, I don’t steal, I never cheated on any of my wives and I never killed anyone that wasn’t trying to kill me. I just don’t need the fantasy, the opiate of the people. to live a moral life.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:02 pm
Robert
Cap and Trade does work and thanks to Bush 41 for doing the right thing.
pat
January 5th, 2010
4:03 pm
One thing is for certain. If all the liberals collectivly held their breath, there certainly would be less hot air in the atmosphere, that’s for sure.
thomas
January 5th, 2010
4:04 pm
Doggone, i have no doubt that I am very entertaining for you. I have and will forever be a very entertaining spirit to those of a 3rd to 6th grade social development. So there is no shock there.
It was shocking you were smart enough to distract from my earlier questions that seem to throw a wrench into the gears of your loved man-Made Global Warming scarecrow.
Even Jay ran from answering those questions, and he usually explains the faults of his arguments to those who question him.
So A++ for the distraction, and A++ for knowing Gore didn’t say he created the internet, he only said he took the initiative to create the internet whatever that means.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:04 pm
never cheated on any of my wives….
Robert
January 5th, 2010
4:05 pm
Cap and Trade does not work.
From the same link posted earlier:
“Further, a study by the Taxpayers Alliance estimates the cost of various green taxes in the UK is up to $1200 per household per year, and that to achieve only a fraction of what Waxman-Markey requires.[7] Again, this points to very high household costs for Waxman-Markey.”
Are we prepared for a tax increase like this? What about the price of energy skyrocketing? Can the average American afford this?
“But cap and trade adds a significant element of instability, which we have seen in Europe with wild swings in the price of carbon allowances, and energy companies less interested in long-term investment and more interested in short-term gaming of the system.”
“And even assuming it works to reduce emissions, Waxman-Markey has been estimated by climate scientist Chip Knappenberger to reduce the earth’s future temperature by no more than 0.2 degree C by 2100.[2]
“But will it even work? Will it even reduce emissions enough to accomplish that 0.2 degree? The European experience with cap and trade strongly urges caution. The Washington Post recently described it as “Exhibit A” of what not to do on climate, and for good reason.[3] The Senate would be wise to take a close look at Europe’s track record with the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and the Emissions Trading Scheme adopted in 2005.”
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:07 pm
Robert
You’ll find the failed cap and trade in the same aisle as the WMD’s.
Lord Help Us
January 5th, 2010
4:08 pm
Jake, you are hopeless, but your self-righteous screed of ‘I never cheated on any of my wives’ just made my day…thanks…
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:08 pm
“he only said he took the initiative to create the internet whatever that means.”
initiative.
google
for whatever that means
Robert
January 5th, 2010
4:16 pm
Mrs. Godzilla, actually the failed cap and trade can be found all over Europe. Is there any leftist tax scheme you are NOT willing to sign up for?
Robert
January 5th, 2010
4:18 pm
Straight from the President’s mouth: “You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:19 pm
Robert
It worked. Bush 41. Deal with it.
You ask, “Is there any leftist tax scheme you are NOT willing to sign up for?”
Actually I’m not crazy about a tax a cadillac health plans.
Feel better?
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:20 pm
OH NOES! Keeping clean air and water might cost us money!
Screw the kids, save the checkbook!
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
January 5th, 2010
4:24 pm
Well, I never cheated on none of my wifes neither, but I’ve only had one and I reckon I ain’t dead yet.
Jake
January 5th, 2010
4:25 pm
Lord – Thanks, you’re obviously too entrenched in the dogma for me to change your mind on anything, or even broaden your horizons much, but I’m glad you at least find me entertaining. I guess having had more than one marriage also makes me a hopelessly immoral reprobate in your eyes, but I still think you have a very rudimentary understanding of ethics. Why else can you not simply display a little ethical common courtesy and respond to my questions? Please impart your moral wisdom on this poor heathen and tell me is the commandment, thou shalt not kill, a moral absolute? I don’t consider your refusal to answer immoral as much as I consider it intellectual cowardice. Perhaps I should quit the ‘Lord” appelation and start calling you Lionbait!
Robert
January 5th, 2010
4:26 pm
Mrs. Godzilla, tell that to the family struggling to pay their energy bill as it is now. I am sure you can afford for your monthly electricity bills to skyrocket, but I don’t think most of America can’t. This makes no sense, and it still won’t do much of anything to actually provide cleaner air and water. Do you even know the specifics of the bill? Spending the same amount of money on better technology would get us there much quicker.
This bill is just another way to add billions to the treasury. I guess our politicians will need this money since their other economic policy blunders will need to be paid for eventually.
Jake
January 5th, 2010
4:27 pm
Redneck – I suppose you always get that same ole pulled pork and beans plate instead of trying the buffet at golden corral!
Matilda
January 5th, 2010
4:29 pm
Ah, it’s TAXES that are objectionable here. Okay. Got it. I suppose you’d like to bring ALL the soldiers home now. Who wants to phone China, the Saudis and everyone else to whom we owe money and tell them they’re not going to get their stinkin’ money EVER, and not to expect next month’s payment? (Nah, nobody will get riled over that.) Then close all the schools, hosptials, roads, bridges, water treatment plants, the CDC, SEC, FDA, and every other entity that requires public funds for the public good. That won’t negatively affect employment or the economy. Live on your own little plot of land (presuming it’s paid off), dig your own wells and latrines, heal your own ailments, and grow and kill all your own food. There now! UTOPIA!
**Yawwwwwn!** Nice bedtime story. What-EV.
Jake
January 5th, 2010
4:29 pm
Lord – Can I still be saved if my first wife died in an MVA and my second died of brast cancer at 37, or am I doomed to the fire and brimstone?
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:30 pm
Robert
Cheaper to pay the electric bill than to have chronic illness.
An interesting read:
The Real Climate Choice Before Congress: Cap and Trade or Command and Control?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-cohen/the-real-climate-choice-b_b_411662.html
I’d guess you’d pick door # 1. I may be wrong…..
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:31 pm
Jake
Sorry to hear of your troubles.
But really that line just jumps off the page.
Married now?
Jake
January 5th, 2010
4:36 pm
Mrs. G – I guess it does, I just put it as another item on the list of what I consider virtues. Ever wonder why this great christian nation doesn’t make breaking that particular commandment against the law? And to answer your question, no I’m single. Too old and too morally bankrupt, apparently, to foist myself off on another poor soul.
Robert
January 5th, 2010
4:36 pm
Matilda,
Trying to show an exaggeration or extreme view such as what you are doing proves nothing. Raising taxes on Americans during a recession is dumb. Skyrocketing electricity rates, as our president said would happen, is even dumber. Your rant about taxes paying for schools, hospitals, roads, etc is not up for debate. You make invalid points and it only shows how out of touch you are with reality.
As far as you, Mrs. Godzilla, quoting the Huffington Post will get you no credibility with me. I won’t even bother reading it as I already know it is going to be biased.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:39 pm
Robert
initiative….whatever that means…..
I understand you.
Mrs. Godzilla
January 5th, 2010
4:44 pm
Oh and Robert
Here’s the Bio on the author of the piece you panned
Steven Cohen is the Executive Director of Columbia University’s Earth Institute and is also Director of the Master of Public Administration Program in Environmental Science and Policy at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. From 2002 to 2006 he directed education programs at the Earth Institute. From 1998 to 2001 Cohen was Vice dean of Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. From 1985 to 1998 he was the Director of Columbia’s Graduate Program in Public Policy and Administration. From 1987-1998 Cohen was Associate Dean for Faculty and Curriculum at SIPA.
He is a graduate of James Madison High School in Brooklyn (1970), Franklin College of Indiana (1974) and the State University of New York at Buffalo (M.A., 1977; Ph.D., 1979). In 1976-77 Cohen was a Ford Foundation Fellow in Urban Environmental Policy; in 1978-79 he was a Rockefeller Foundation Fellow in Public and Environmental Policy and Implementation.
You coulda’ tossed a John Coleman article out…..initiative…just sayin’.
Matilda
January 5th, 2010
4:50 pm
Robert, oh, I think I’ve got a pretty good handle on your idea of reality. You’re just snarky because I don’t share your fondness for the taste. Tell me again how the DE-regulation of the natural gas industry here in Georgia a few years ago fostered competition that lowered my gas bills, whydoncha. That was a brilliant free-market scam that raped us all that January and left thousands with no heat for their homes in weather just like this. Do you work for Georgia Power Company?
Hillbilly Deluxe
January 5th, 2010
4:56 pm
Tell me again how the DE-regulation of the natural gas industry here in Georgia a few years ago fostered competition that lowered my gas bills, whydoncha.
Most anybody who was living in Georgia at that time, knows that was a fiasco with a capital “F”.
Kamchak
January 5th, 2010
4:57 pm
…quoting the Huffington Post will get you no credibility with me. I won’t even bother reading it as I already know it is going to be biased.
Yet you posted a link at 3:58 to The Heritage Foundation.
Glass house, meet stone.
mark G.
January 5th, 2010
5:05 pm
The data in support of global warming is false, the Scientists (who gain funding from Global warming threats) fail to tell you that most of the temperature increases are in places where asphalt and concrete now cover the landscape which was not true in the 50s. Soon in order to keep funding they will start crying that the cold temperatures are evidence of instablity cause by man’s pollution.
Kevin H
January 5th, 2010
5:18 pm
And the point is what? I think beofre we enact economically debillating cap and trade legislation, we should test the data used by the East Anglia lab and let other scientists, not politicians or commentators, test the information before we conclude that global temeprature changes are caused by man.
Jay is Confused
January 5th, 2010
5:26 pm
Sorry Jay…you have bought into a baseless theory. It is right at the top of the other lies being propagated by the current administration. Hopefully the cold weather will wake some folks up…by the way, Jay, it is going to be a long cold winter…sorry to disappoint.
Matilda
January 5th, 2010
5:27 pm
Kevin, no offense, but who’s “We,” and what “other scientists?” The officials in our government are making proposals based on data the vast majority of scientists agree on, at least in part. Like, are YOU and your buddies gonna do the tests? Or do you suggest we rely ONLY on the conclusions of disagreeing scientists funded by the energy conglomerates profiting from our current prevailing methods of generating energy? Does your particular science degree and experience trump those of the MAJORITY of scientists in the world? Just curious.
Stephen S
January 5th, 2010
5:32 pm
When the changes proposed, such as cap and trade, do very minimal to help the environment, raised gas prices over $10.00, and hugely increase electric bills, at a time when the economy is already terrible, yes, going green, in Obama’s way, is a horrible idea. Very invasive too and another attack on our personal freedoms. The fact of the matter is, no alternative fuels are even anywhere close to being economically viable. Until then, we are stuck with oil and gas. Deal with it. There are plenty of other ways to help the environment. Green people are foolish in wanting to rush forward without a viable alternative. If we bankrupt oil and gas companies intentionally, as Obama wants to do, imagine our security when we are 100% dependent on foreign oil…geez.
Linda
January 5th, 2010
5:34 pm
According to CBS News’ Declan McCullagh, the Climate Research Unit (CRU) @ the U of E. Anglia (in the UK), in global warming circles, “wields outside influence: It claims the world’s largest temperature data set, & its work & mathematical models were incorporated into the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel in Climate Change’s 2007 report. The report… is what the Environmental Protection Agency acknowledge it “relies on most heavily’ when concluding carbon dioxide emission endanger public health & should be regulated.”
We know that over 1000 of their emails & 72 documents for the last 13 yrs.were hacked which proved they colluded in manipulating data, refused access to their data thru the Freedom of Info Act, colluded in preventing papers by dissenting scientists being published in scientific journals & corroborated to delete emails & files & change data.
There’s a very disturbing file of comments, 274 pages long, by a climatologist/programmer at CRU named Ian “Harry” Harris attempting to recreate the applications & algorithms that ran the original data from ‘06-’09, a huge statistical database (11,000 files) that are the foundation of the study of climate change, recordings from hundreds of weather stations around the world of temperatures & precipitation measurements from 1901-2006. Google Harry Read Me or go to:
http://www.floppingaces.net/2009/11/30/climategates-harry-read-me-file-is-a-must-read/
Spend at least a minute on this site.
Abe Lincoln
January 5th, 2010
5:40 pm
Not even Bookman’s predictable diatribe of hot air can warm this up. BULLSH*T!
mike
January 5th, 2010
5:44 pm
Doggone –
“After all…gravity is just a theory, right? You need to learn the difference between a theory and a SCIENTIFIC theory. They are not the same thing.”
Gravity is not a theory. It is a law. Shouldn’t need a dumb conservative to tell you that. I thought global warming advocates were supposed to know a lot about science. Or at least a little.
Comparing skepticism of climate change theories and the law of gravity is silly and says more about your own ignorance than anything else.
mike
January 5th, 2010
5:48 pm
There is definitely truth in many things that Bookman is saying. However his claim that you cant look at short time periods to determine a trend is what makes me skeptical about global warming alarmism.
As Jay’s chart shows, we saw cooling in the 60s. I am not convinced the 50 years of warming necessarily dictates continuing rises.
JMoore
January 5th, 2010
6:05 pm
What a load of Mule Muffins! LOL Jay.
Without a brain Jay...
January 5th, 2010
6:09 pm
To effectively measure if there has been any change…we would need hundreds of years of data…not less than 150 years.
Do you really want us to make policy based on this little amount of data?
During the 1700’s there was a worldwide mini ice age…what caused that? No body knows for sure…just cyclical in nature.
Chas
January 5th, 2010
6:12 pm
Maybe the earth is shifting its axis (the way it is oriented to the sun) This shift has occured before. If so this could account for the climate changes. But do we have instruments that could measure this shift if it is actually occuring??
All I'm Saying Is...
January 5th, 2010
6:15 pm
For me the question is what is the relevant span of time to assess whether climate change is real. Back in the late 1960s/early 1970s, the fear was the coming Ice Age. More recently is human-being exacerbated global warming. Question is: do you measure climate change in decades, centuries, or over thousands of years in order to know if a meaningful and irreversible trend is occurring and not simply the cold or hot portion of a pattern of periods of cooling (Joe D. or Pete Rose in a slump) or warming (Joe D. or Pete Rose on a hitting streak). And has the trend line permanently shifted due to actions by humans (a really egotistical notion, don’t you think, that humankind can have such a drastic impact) or is it going to trend colder at some point due to the recurrence of a historical pattern overwhelming what we wee humans can really cause?
Good subject, Jay, that is rarely intelligently discussed. Thanks for the dialog.
Jones
January 5th, 2010
6:41 pm
Cynthia and Bookman have been really hitting the blogs hard lately. Scary Stuff.
Brad
January 5th, 2010
7:08 pm
It might be colder if not for global warming? Well hell, THANK GOD for global warming then! So Jay, I guess you are saying since global warming is a good thing, we shouldn’t fight it! Welcome, global warming! Welcome!
Randy_O
January 5th, 2010
7:13 pm
Jeff, quit drinking the cool aid!! Weather is a cyclic event that will increase to a local maximum and then decrease to a local minimum with some shifts or translations. Look at your bar chart, we reached a local minimum in the 70s. If you do enough research (not Al Gores propaganda) you can find the cycle time for this cycle and even publish an almanac!! Theres the money my friends!
Al gore and the rest of the green movement only want green as in money. They hit us with the dooms day threat and then tell us how to remedy the problem by following their cure and like lambs to the slaughter we line up with cash in hand and the press in tow because it a “hot story”. Now that we all know it is media BS and relax and wait the the apocalypse come when the unseen planet killer asteroid takes us all.
itpdude
January 5th, 2010
7:26 pm
Okay, the planet is warming. Let’s say it is manmade global warming. There is no way in that scenario we could EVER get China or India or most other developing countries to take pro-active steps to stem their own pollution. Those developing countries, because they are trying to kickstart their own industrial revolution, tend to pollute more by using the cheapest fuel available and that stuff is usually dirty. They use fuels like coal. There is no way we can stop it. The US could go 100% green and there is no way to stop man-made global warming.
If it’s natural, well, there is nothing we can do about that either.
So, it is time for us to face the facts and realize we will have to deal with global warming in new and innovative ways. Some of that may be with particles to reflect the suns rays, or in nano-tech carbon dioxide eaters, or developing thorium as a common nuclear fuel for everything from power plants to passenger cars.
The genie is in the box. We can no more stop man-made global warming than we could have stopped nuclear proliferation. Those who think we can conserve our way out are fooling themselves and slowing progress towards active solutions rather than the current reactionary green movement.
LR
January 5th, 2010
8:13 pm
Dave, you are so full of SH–. You really don’t think we believe or ever believed the crap about manmade global warming. You probably hollered Y2K, end of the world, too.
H1N1 Pandemic!!! Good God. The government (which includes pawns like you) spreads fear so it can sell its solutions. But then again, all this might make you a millionaire like Al the whore Gore.
LR
January 5th, 2010
8:15 pm
OOPS, sorry I meant Jay
TGT
January 5th, 2010
8:19 pm
So, of the temperature records we’ve seen in the last 60 years, about 55% have been record highs and about 45% have been record lows. Granted there has been an upswing in the last ten years, but the overall temperature data here does not mesh too well with the carbon emissions data from the same time period. (See here.)
According to the emissions graph, the U.S. has seen a steady increase in carbon output throughout the same time period noted from the NCAR chart, yet the temperature data was up and down as far as the extremes go. According to the carbon graph, the steepest increase was in the 1960’s, yet this period had the largest ratio of low to high temperature records.
Bman
January 5th, 2010
8:31 pm
Flawed science = flawed result.
No wonder you write for a second…er third rate paper
Taxpayer
January 5th, 2010
9:27 pm
Contrary to what some would have others believe, global warming is still here and it is still real and the data bear that out and that data and its analysis is out there for all to see. If you cannot find it, let me know and I’ll point you to it.
TGT
January 5th, 2010
9:49 pm
Here’s some data for you Taxpayer: The graph Al Gore doesn’t want you to see. (To go along with my data at 8:19.)
So, of the temperature records we’ve seen in the last 60 years, about 55% have been record highs and about 45% have been record lows. Granted there has been an upswing in the last ten years, but the overall temperature data here does not mesh too well with the carbon emissions data from the same time period. (See According to the emissions graph, the U.S. has seen a steady increase in carbon output throughout the same time period noted from the NCAR chart, yet the temperature data was up and down as far as the extremes go. According to the carbon graph, the steepest increase was in the 1960’s, yet this period had the largest ratio of low to high temperature records.
TGT
January 5th, 2010
9:50 pm
Ignore the repeat of that second paragraph.
Taxpayer
January 5th, 2010
10:09 pm
That’s real pretty, TGT, but I kind of have a preference for graphs with real labeled scales on the x and y axes and everything drawn to match those scales. Like I said though, it is real pretty.
Charles
January 5th, 2010
10:21 pm
Coldest Orange Bowl Game Ever. Read about it on the AJC:
http://www.ajc.com/sports/georgia-tech/coldest-orange-bowl-ever-267893.html
Byron Mathison Kerr
January 5th, 2010
10:30 pm
A “convenient denial” is always easier than an “inconvenient truth” — but certainly not in the long run and certainly not for future generations!
(And the Earth is round and revolves around the Sun — in case any of you haven’t quite caught up with that little scientific discovery.)
TGT
January 5th, 2010
10:40 pm
Taxpayer: Of course the x-axis is labeled clearly. If you notice on the far right of the graph (you can enlarge it) zero on the on the y-axis is the period normal temp. of 57º F.
Nice try though.
Waddlesworth Lumplevin
January 6th, 2010
1:58 am
The coldest day in 100 years in Al Gore’s hometown. First snow in 14 years on the day Obama gave his Copenhagen speech. Meanwhile, Pelosi’s flight cancelled due to blizzard when she tries o fly to Copenhagen. record colds in Europe and Asia this week. I think this is all a conspiracy by Bush, the cons, and the global capitalist conspiracy. they must’ve created a weather button to control things. Either that, or God is laughing his ass off.
John Coleman
January 6th, 2010
7:20 am
I founded the Weather Channel. Look that up.
Adrian
January 6th, 2010
8:21 am
Show me the CC computer models, from as recent as 2005, which are predicting alarming temps as soon as 2015, that predicted the cooling in 2008-9, …, then maybe the doubters could be swayed to believe the CC warnings. It seems the scientific community is satisfied with saying the current cooling is only masking the current warming. Maybe that is so, but show me the model that predicted it.
mark G.
January 6th, 2010
11:47 am
itpdude, nano-tech carbon dioxide eaters scare the crap out of me, they will run amuck and start eating us from the inside out and all life on the planet will die. Last I checked living things on our planet needs carbon dioxid.
Sandy Springs Guy
January 6th, 2010
12:37 pm
Lord Help Us
Lots of ’scientists’ working for the tobacco industry used to say that nicotine is not addictive and can be good for you.
Thank goodness we did a little research on that issue…
This is exactly why we should not believe the global Warming “scientists”, they print what their sugar daddies tell them “discover”
sam
January 6th, 2010
4:40 pm
Man-made global warming is real and it represents a huge threat to humanity. Scientific data has shown that for years and pretty much all scientist agree on that unless they work for so called “think tanks” funded by the oil and gas industry which only cares about short term profits. Climate change is real, folks, even if it gets cold every once in awhile, and the sooner we do something about it the less severe the consequences. My guess is though that a lot of people will stick their head in the sand until Miami is under water…if someone wants to believe the earth is flat that’s just what they are gonna believe, after all it looks flat from down here.
mark G.
January 7th, 2010
2:10 pm
Sam, we can only hope that Miami goes under water. If we believe the global warming scientists it will take 100s of years for the water to rise high enough to put Miami under water in a worst case scenario. If people are stupid enough not to move as the water rises then they get what they deserve. Kind of like rebuilding New Orleans, a City below see level on the coast(oh, right they actually did that) I live a 100 miles from the Jersey shore, I really can’t wait until it’s only a short drive to the cost. And 5 degrees warmer will mean that instead of a high of 30F today in PA it will be 35F. Bring on the heat.
Tyc
January 7th, 2010
3:43 pm
Global warming is happening. Scientific data and research has been collected from more than just a few hundred years ago. Man is speeding up this process everyday by doing nothing to help. It is sad that we as humans never want to face the truth till it is staring us in the face and by then it is too late.
sam
January 7th, 2010
4:54 pm
yeah, a shorter drive to the beach and an extra 5 degrees during a cold PA winter sound kind of nice, Mark G, but you might not get enough to eat when all the droughts and flooding caused by climate change are ruining crops around the world.
reality
January 7th, 2010
8:27 pm
what an idiot. is he that stupid or does he think we are?