I’m thinking that frog is just about boiled by now
I went out to bring in my newspaper this morning and thought I had been transported to south Florida. As I write, at 7:50 a.m. in the middle of January, it is 63 degrees outside.
And then of course there’s stuff like this:
A massive dust storm approaches the western coast of Australia by sea.
And that’s not all, not by a long shot:
WORCESTER, England — Britons may remember 2012 as the year the weather spun off its rails in a chaotic concoction of drought, deluge and flooding, but the unpredictability of it all turns out to have been all too predictable: Around the world, extreme has become the new commonplace.
Especially lately. China is enduring its coldest winter in nearly 30 years. Brazil is in the grip of a dreadful heat spell. Eastern Russia is so freezing — minus 50 degrees Fahrenheit, and counting — that the traffic lights recently stopped working in the city of Yakutsk.
Bush fires are raging across Australia, fueled by a record-shattering heat wave. Pakistan was inundated by unexpected flooding in September. A vicious storm bringing rain, snow and floods just struck the Middle East. And in the United States, scientists confirmed this week what people could have figured out simply by going outside: Last year was the hottest since records began.
“Each year we have extreme weather, but it’s unusual to have so many extreme events around the world at once,” said Omar Baddour, chief of the data management applications division at the World Meteorological Association, in Geneva. “The heat wave in Australia; the flooding in the U.K., and most recently the flooding and extensive snowstorm in the Middle East — it’s already a big year in terms of extreme weather calamity.”
Such events are increasing in intensity as well as frequency, Mr. Baddour said, a sign that climate change is not just about rising temperatures, but also about intense, unpleasant, anomalous weather of all kinds.
Palestinians in Hebron put the finishing touches on a snowman after record snowfalls hit the area. (AP)
– Jay Bookman
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
252 comments Add your comment
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:24 am
See also “Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy”
JamVet
January 11th, 2013
10:24 am
Apparently our brilliant Republicans were all home schooled.
And English, mathematics, science and history were all electives that they did not take.
I remember when the GOP has SOME intellectual aspects to it and actually listened to the world’s experts in these areas and not the Jerry Falwells out there.
The result was that they went from the brilliant Nixon to the moronic Bush in thirty years.
Stay ignorant, my friends…
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
10:24 am
all this oil we’re sucking out of the ground
Leave your warm-up exercises out of this, RB.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 11th, 2013
10:24 am
10:17 –
– just as I said in the very first post on the topic …
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
10:24 am
td: “The AR-15 LOOKS like the M-16 but the functionality is totally different and is therefore not a military weapon. I guess it is the looks that scare all you progressives”
You’re trying to divert from the issue by making an irrelevant point about functionality and features. The weapon was originally developed for military purposes, and that history cannot be eliminated.
So by isolating on the single word “military” and then convincing yourself that these weapons are not of that type, does that settle the issue for you, put your mind at rest?
It doesn’t mine.
TiredOfIt
January 11th, 2013
10:25 am
Redneck Convert (R–and proud of it)
January 11th, 2013
8:53 am
Well, our weird weather is God’s Will. The Bible speaks of Trials and Tribulations. When you get up in the morning in January and you’re sweating, it’s Trials and Tribulations. Repent, you Sinners!
++
If God can’t even take on the devil, the weather must be way above his powers.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:25 am
td: Define militia as intended by the founding fathers?
All able bodied men. Now how about you define “well-regulated” as defined by the Founding Fathers? Or did you forget that part?
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:26 am
” And which Bush policy caused it?”
Actually Bush said he believed in global warming, but as usual do blather on
td
January 11th, 2013
10:27 am
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:20 am
The only thing you have proven is that you are a radical environmentalist. .06 degrees in a 100 year period is not conclusive scientific evidence that man made carbon emissions is going to ruin the world if we do not end them now. You can preach all you want but it is not proof that we need to add a carbon tax, cut out oil and coal use. Dream on my my friend because we just do not believe it.
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
10:27 am
Apparently our brilliant Republicans were all home schooled
…by a beat-down yard dog.
RB from Gwinnett
January 11th, 2013
10:28 am
USinUK, “yes. because things can ONLY be called one thing. god forbid we have more than one name for something – it confuses the addle-minded.”
Yea, tool, when the data stops supporting “warming”, lets call it something else, right? And blaming every storm, heat wave, snow storm, hurricane, tornado and breeze over 5mph on “climate change” as if all those events weren’t occuring before Bush’s evil environmental policies is just stupid. But if you want to ride along on the stupid bus, climb aboard!!
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 11th, 2013
10:29 am
“The only thing you have proven is that you are a radical environmentalist. .06 degrees in a 100 year period is not conclusive scientific evidence that man made carbon emissions is going to ruin the world if we do not end them now.”
wow. I suggest that, when you want to go stick your head in the sand you do it here:
http://peakwater.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/rio-20-united-states-drought-fish_56489_600×450.jpg
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
10:29 am
Actually Bush said he believed in global warming, but as usual do blather on
lots of Republicans used to profess belief in man’s role in climate change. They proposed more moderate, market-driven approaches to address it. When Democrats decided that maybe less moderate, control-economy approaches weren’t going to get passed, and decided to go the Republican route, all of a sudden Republicans weren’t believing in it any more.
I’m sure that last bit was just a coincidence.
USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)
January 11th, 2013
10:30 am
“Yea, tool, when the data stops supporting “warming”, lets call it something else, right?”
it hasn’t stopped supporting warming … DEAREST … http://www.planetseed.com/files/uploadedimages/Science/Earth_Science/Global_Climate_Change_and_Energy/Related_Articles/global_temp1.jpg
talking about climate change encompasses MORE than just temperatures – it also includes drought, floods, extreme storms, etc.
stands for decibels
January 11th, 2013
10:31 am
GUN SHEETZ! yeeee hawwww!!! load up on the stupid, folks.
Erwin's cat
January 11th, 2013
10:32 am
And English, mathematics, science and history were all electives that they did not take.
like this guy?
http://rps3.com/Pages/Burt_Rutan_on_Climate_Change.htm
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:32 am
RB
angry much?
That ODS is on your a$$
td
January 11th, 2013
10:32 am
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
10:24 am
I hunt with a 30.06 semi auto rifle and I have a 20 round clip for it. It has a great deal more knock down power then the .223 AR-15 so that means it will kill a person easier then the AR-15. My rifle is on no ones list to ban. Like I said the AR-15 looks like the M-16 so therefore in the eyes of you progressives it must be bad and should be banned. Typical logic of the left.
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
10:33 am
td — “Define militia as intended by the founding fathers?”
You mean “well-regulated” militia.
Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist #29: “The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.
Hamilton doesn’t like the notion of training the citizenry to the standard of a “well-regulated militia,” but he clearly admits that it includes lots and lots of training and military drills.
Records of the Continental Congress agree: “Resolved , That this appointment be conferred on experienced and vigilant general officers, who are acquainted with whatever relates to the general economy, manoeuvres and discipline of a well regulated army.”
George Washington spoke approvingly of the proper regulation of troops and the value thereof: “I am unacquainted with the extent of your works, and consequently ignorant of the number or men necessary to man them. If your present numbers should be insufficient for that purpose, I would then by all means advise your making up the deficiency out of the best regulated militia that can be got.”
It’s worth observing that several individual States ( VA and PA among them), in their Constitutions and founding document, *specifically* spoke to and addressed an *individual right* to keep firearms, but the Federal Constitution does not. Despite that, the SCOTUS in Heller decided that the Founders meant it anyway (despite the fact that they could have put it in but didn’t).
If the Founders *wanted* a personal right to keep firearms *distinct* and separate from the militia, they could easily have put in into the Constitution. But they didn’t — they linked it to being part of the militia, since they didn’t envision a standing army.
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 states that Congress has the authority to: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”
“To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”
Uh, isn’t all that the job of the Army?
Nope. Not as the Founders saw it. They provided for a standing Navy to protect commerce and shipping from piracy on the high seas, but they didn’t like the notion of a standing Army. In fact, the Constitution expressly FORBIDS Congress for appropriating any money for an Army for a period longer than two years. They *clearly* intended for an Army to be raised only when needed — because the militia wasn’t enough to do the job. And they *clearly* intended for the Army to be *disbanded* following the completion of its task.
It always amazes me how conservatives go on and on about “original intent” while not really being all that conversant with the Constitution, its history and the opinions and writings of the Founders.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:33 am
td: The only thing you have proven is that you are a radical environmentalist. .06 degrees in a 100 year period is not conclusive scientific evidence that man made carbon emissions is going to ruin the world if we do not end them now
No, but the science behind those numbers IS proof that global warming is happening, and that man is mostly the cause.
I have not proven myself to be an environmentalist at all, as I have not suggested a time frame for global warming reaching a tipping point, nor have I suggested some of the remedies that I object to, like the carbon tax.
If pointing out that the science conclusively proves that global warming does exist. however slight, and that man is mostly the cause of the change, makes me an “environmentalist” in your eyes then you have shown once again you are merely paranoid and reactionary.
And THAT is why I generally don’t have discussions with climate change deniers.
Climate Change discussion = OMG THE SKY IS FALLING according to conservatives
Gun Control discussion = OMG CONFISCATION according to conservatives.
.
New Rule: Everybody needs to Calm The F*** Down.
JamVet
January 11th, 2013
10:35 am
…when the data stops supporting “warming”…
And when the data stops supporting a sun-centered solar system…
One more time, you Republicans are a willfully stupid laughinstock to the educated people of the world.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:35 am
td: And for the record, I have zero incentive to suggest cutting out oil use.
If you’ve been paying attention, you would know why.
Erwin's cat
January 11th, 2013
10:38 am
No, but the science behind those numbers IS proof that global warming is happening, and that man is mostly the cause.
“proof”…I think not
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:40 am
OK Erwin, semantics at best. It SHOWS VERY STRONGLY that humans are mostly the cause and that lobal warming is happening.
Just like gravity and relativity, it hasn’t been “proven.”
Happy now? Of course not, because I just blew apart your semantics.
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:41 am
Excuse me, correction:
OK Erwin, semantics at best. It SHOWS VERY STRONGLY that humans are mostly the cause and that global warming is happening.
Just like gravity and relativity, it hasn’t been “proven.”
Happy now? Of course not, because I just blew apart your semantics.
moonbat betty
January 11th, 2013
10:41 am
GAME OVER, MAN! Game over.
Stick a fork in that frog
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY
will-o-the-wisp
January 11th, 2013
10:41 am
I’ll trade places with you for a while, out my window it is 20 deg with blowing snow lo tonight -5 hi in the am 5 deg may get above freezing by thursday. we need the snow because 2012 had low snow pack; where my water comes from, and some neighbors have no water pressure, because of drought, out here in the perimeter, we had forest fires in november.
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:42 am
td
Who is the manufacturer of your 30.06?
moonbat betty
January 11th, 2013
10:42 am
It’s a psycho bill freak out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qn4lJqbv7So330pds
Ronald Reagan
January 11th, 2013
10:45 am
Global warming was designed by Liberals for Liberals who will believe anything they’re told.
MrLiberty
January 11th, 2013
10:46 am
When I saw the title I actually thought you were talking about the frog of liberty and freedom in this country. As the old saying goes, if you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water he will immediately jump out, but if you put him in cold water and slowly heat it, he will sit there and tolerate the heat until its too late. Among freedom lovers, that analogy is used routinely to describe what has gone on in america. We in this country have been doing just that with government destruction of our freedoms and liberties for over 100 years and for some crazy reason I actually thought that you, Jay, were actually saying that the government had finally gotten the water hot enough to cook the frog.
Well, the analogy is still appropriate even though a progressive liberal like you don’t actually think that the loss of liberties and freedom is a bad thing.
RB from Gwinnett
January 11th, 2013
10:46 am
Keep, “Now where do I order my $28 Obamacare pizza?”
It was $25 and here’s your answer.
http://mypizza.com/restaurant/menu/849
Even the veggie pie is over $25. You asked for it and now you have the proof, so STFU!!
Adam
January 11th, 2013
10:49 am
RB: Vegan and gluten free pizzas being more expensive proves…. what, exactly? And what does that have to do with Obamacare?
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:50 am
RB
Take a valium or something. Your ODS is flaring up bad.
Who the hell are you to tell someone to STFU?
Looking in the mirror and telling yourself that would be more appropriate.
td
January 11th, 2013
10:50 am
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:42 am
td
Who is the manufacturer of your 30.06?
Browning
Nero
January 11th, 2013
10:51 am
Global warming is real. Any rational person can see the effects in recent abnormal weather patterns and warming trends. However, all the Nancy hand-wringing by the professional Greens and the scientific community in the West amuses me. With populations of 1.3 billion and 1.2 billion respectively, China and India are on the cusp of making current pollution levels look like child’s play. Its gonna get worse, and no amount of carbon based remediation in the West will alleviate it. All it will accomplish is hamstringing economic development here and in Europe, while the booming economies of China and India barrel on like a freight train. They’ll continually pump out more and more greenhouse gases while we pat ourselves on the back and say what a great job we did to stem the tide of Global Warming. Meanwhile they laugh their asses off at us and nothing changes except who’s doing the polluting. Chumps.
Regnad Kcin
January 11th, 2013
10:51 am
“what was living in the vast wasteland that is the middle east oil fields in large enough quantities to have produced all this fossilized material? And what happened to all of it? ”
google “bacterial mats”
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:52 am
td
Cool. You must be a bad shot. I don’t know many people who hunt deer with a 20 rd magazine.
Regnad Kcin
January 11th, 2013
10:52 am
Ooh – is RB gonna burst a blood vessel all over the blog?
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:53 am
upstairs
td
January 11th, 2013
10:55 am
TBS
January 11th, 2013
10:52 am
td
Cool. You must be a bad shot. I don’t know many people who hunt deer with a 20 rd magazine.
Do not usually hunt with the 20 round clip but I picked it up a few years ago at a gun show.
will-o-the-wisp
January 11th, 2013
10:56 am
well, when i escaped that feces pit you call georgia/atlanta after the olympics, and arrived on my mountain 10,000 feet above sea level, there was permafrost about 8″ down — gone now, did not find any when digging for new septic tank, so where did it go; and, in summer (grasses) grow up to about 13,000 feet.
alittlecommonsense
January 11th, 2013
11:02 am
I love the fact that we can now blame every weather phenomenon on CO2. What used to be “Global Warming” is now just “Climate Change”.
Lots of Hurricanes? Climate Change!
Drought? Climate Change!
Flooding? Climate Change!
Snow in the Desert? Climate Change!
Mudslides? Climate Change!
Earthquake? Sure – let’s even blame that on Climate Change!
Joe Hussein Mama
January 11th, 2013
11:05 am
WOW — “in summer (grasses) grow up to about 13,000 feet.”
That’s some TALL effing grass.
Welcome to the Occupation
January 11th, 2013
11:09 am
td: “Like I said the AR-15 looks like the M-16 so therefore in the eyes of you progressives it must be bad and should be banned. Typical logic of the left”
“Must be bad”? “Should be banned”? Naah. Just should be made next to impossible to get.
You see, you’re getting all defensive and categorical about it.
In any case the weapon more than “looks like” the M-16. It was the basis for its development. Kind of a big difference you know.
“”I hunt with a 30.06 semi auto rifle and I have a 20 round clip for it. It has a great deal more knock down power then the .223 AR-15 so that means it will kill a person easier then the AR-15″
See, you’re getting all lost in hair-splitting again. I’m not saying ban one but not the other, or just ban one type. I’m saying basically BAN ALL of them.
See? Nicccce and simple.
And people who have a problem with that and want to hoard these slaughter tools should be forced to swallow that pill. And when they refuse, they should be prosecuted and incarcerated.
Now how’s THAT for “totalitarian leftist” for you?
will-o-the-wisp
January 11th, 2013
11:11 am
no, the grasses grow on mountains at that elevation; and, the oxygen content is less than 40 percent of what you get, and in drought of 2012 it was these grasses that would ignite first initiating forest fires.
dbm
January 11th, 2013
11:53 am
I saw several posts taking the cheap, easy way and just ridiculing F. Sinkwich. Finally Steve took the more constructive path and posted a helpful link.
I don’t have time to read all the posts. Did someone post a link to a meteorology site that contains info on just how increased average temperatures cause more extreme weather of all kinds? If not, I hope someone does. I might even do it if I can find the time (LOL) to locate such a site and find out how to post a link.
Mr Right
January 11th, 2013
12:03 pm
Where is Al Gore when we need him ? Oh, he is soaking in his big oil money he just recieved!
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
January 11th, 2013
1:51 pm
Once again the Republican Conservative types are on the wrong side of Science.
Im stunned.
They are however slowly coming around.
According to a new survey from the Pew Research Center, 48 percent of self-identified Republicans said there is “solid evidence” of climate change. That number is up 5 points from last year and 13 points from 2009. Still the figure is lower than what it was in 2006 and 2007, and right about where it stood in 2008.
dbm
January 11th, 2013
2:17 pm
indigo
January 11th, 2013
8:50 am
“Runaway business greed” has very little to do with it. It is mainly due to the following:
1. It was not possible to be sure what was happening until the process had been going for a while.
2. Weather and climate are very complicated phenomena, leaving lots of room for confusion and misunderstanding.
3. The “cry wolf” phenomenon. There has been a long history of the left coming up with various concerns and alarms which are touted as justifying this government intervention or that, but which usually don’t. Those who understand this process and/or have practical knowledge of the damage it does have to resist it as best they can. Many of these people perceive climate change as another example of this, and are thus very skeptical. I think this time there really is a wolf, but the skepticism is very understandable.
4. To the extent that anyone exaggerated the strength of the scientific case or the scientific consensus at an early stage when they weren’t so strong, or that anyone used invalid arguments to push the issue, this would tend to reinforce the skepticism.
5. Vague thinking about the “common good”, as opposed to focusing clearly on the point that individual humans are or will be physically aggressed against by climate change, slows down the process of recognizing that government action is appropriate.
Christian Conservative
January 11th, 2013
3:13 pm
So making people pay more for gas and electricity will solve all these problems… Go figure….
dbm
January 13th, 2013
9:02 pm
I forgot one.
6. Non-Western nations so far have been reluctant to get on board. Is this “runaway greed” on their part?