The Polar Vortex does NOT disprove global warming.

The polar vortex is moving across the United States, and a large area of our nation is facing bitter cold. As many Americans are dealing with temperatures well below zero, the Right-wing media is pointing to the cold snap as so-called proof that global warming is a myth. What these conservative talking heads don't understand – or simply choose to ignore – is that global warming refers to rising average temperatures around the globe.

The cold that we are experiencing right now is weather, and it does not disprove the fact that our world is getting hotter. In fact, these extreme, frigid temperatures hit the U.S. after the 2nd-hottest December since 1979 and the warmest November on record. Global warming is not going to eliminate winter in our nation any time soon, but the extreme highs and lows can lead to more extreme hurricanes, droughts, and - yes - even snow storms.

Temperatures of 32 below zero in Fargo, North Dakota and negative 15 in Chicago don't disprove global warming, but they may be part of the larger pattern of weather “weirding” that we're experiencing because of climate change. It's time for the climate-change-skeptics to stop denying science, and start recognizing reality. The Right should stop wasting time trying to disprove climate change, and start helping us try to minimize its impact. Yes, it's bitterly cold outside, but overall our planet is getting warmer. Now, let's do something about it while we still have a chance.

Comments

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#1

It sure hasn't been cold here in southwestern Oregon! This winter we've had very little rain compared to most winters. Sorta like psuedo spring. I love the nice weather but I worry about drought. The same thing seems to be happening in California.

Meanwhile the fossil fuel shills just won't shut up. Any time I see an article on Der Spiegel about climate-related topics, those damn fools are on it like brown on poop, filling the accompanying blog with their science-bashing crap. Corporate propaganda never takes a vacation! We get it all the time, from every imaginable source, and we must condition ourselves to ignore it. After all, the only people worth hearing on this issue are the scientists. I never cease to be amazed by the arrogance of industry shills who have the bloody audacity to be arguing with actual experts on this subject. It really is outrageous, how those who've spent their lives studying climate science should have to come up against this sort of stridentl, aggressive, willful ignorance.

Fifty years ago, who could have anticipated the tyranny that the fossil fuel industry would come to represent? The bloated price we pay at the pump is the least of it, folks. Just think of the wars we keep fighting over oil! Think of the millions of deaths, worldwide: not only from all the innocents massacred in those wars, but from the pollution of cancer-causing chemicals contaminating our air and water! Think of the "eminant domain" property owners suddenly find themselves up against, with these industry hacks determined to steal their land! Think of the oil spills, the disasters, the earthquakes caused by fracking.... where does it end?!

And let's not forget another major culprit behind global warming: corporate farming! Both these industries pose a threat to our very existence. Our way of life is long overdue for an overhaul. - Aliceinwonderland

ckrob's picture
ckrob 8 years 47 weeks ago
#2

Off topic, the following could be used by the Dems on Repubs:

"Rep or Senator Blank, please go back to your state (or home town) and find a bunch of those lazy, shiftless folks that are unemployed and make an example of them! Tell them that they wouldn't need unemployment insurance if they would just try harder to get a job even if they have to go to Thailand where their old job went. Tell them get off their rears and stop being dependent on us taxpayers." Want to see how that goes over back home when you're saying the same thing there that you vote for in Washington? The topic could switch to food stamps for Walmart employees just for variety.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#3

Aliceinwonderland ~ You sure are right about the same thing happening in California; and, I'm lovin' it. There is a present danger of drought; however, that is mostly for the south. We here in the north aren't too worried yet.

When you say, "...sort of strident, aggressive, willful ignorance," you pretty much describe the entire country. Currently, we are being conditioned to idolize this sort of irresponsible behavior. Science and education is the enemy. People are acting accordingly. I see it even amongst the more skilled and educated crowd. Ignorance and lack of respect for expertise is alive and prospering in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Finally...

Quote Aliceinwonderland:Our way of life is long overdue for an overhaul.

Brilliantly, ironically, and poetically said.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 8 years 47 weeks ago
#4

Great weather does not always reveal the invisible danger lurking beneath. RE: the youtube video showing dangerous radiation levels on a California Beach...most likely from Fukushima. And it has been revealed that there was a secret agreement between Japan and the US about keeping revelations of radiation levels censored....so that they don't "spook the people".

In the youtube video, it showed radiation levels going up to 150 CPM at times on the beach and about 30-40 CPM background radiation further from the beach. 100 CPM background radiation trips alarms and is not considered very safe. The authorities, after that youtube went viral, did their own study and said "you have nothing to worry about...all is well...don't panic...the radiation levels that guy detected were probably just 'red painted' eating utensils buried under the sand".

http://rt.com/usa/fukushima-geiger-california-radiation-238/

http://fukushimavoice-eng2.blogspot.com/2014/01/tokyo-shimbun-article-re...

Of course radiation from the Sun kills more people every year than man-made radiation. Melanoma anyone? So enjoy the nice weather...go out and get plenty of sun, won't you? As for me, I'm staying inside where it is warm and face only the electromechanical radiation levels from my microwave, TV, computer monitor, and house wiring. FFFrrrreeezzzzing outside! Arctic Vortex, indeed!

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 8 years 47 weeks ago
#5

I hear that things are getting pretty dry in California these days. Reservoirs drying up. What ever happened to Hetch Hetchy? So, some groups want to restore the valley to it's original pristine greatness while risking the severity of droughts. And then there's the battle between the people who make a living from fish in the northern states (fish dying of lack of water taken by agribusiness) and the agribusinesses in the south who need to irrigate.

I wonder if they still have those signs along HWY 5 in California that say something like "Congress created wasteland"? I always thought these right-wing agribusiness welfare queens thought that God was the all powerful entity that we should thank for plenty of water and good weather and Satan was the entity that managed to foul things up. Maybe those signs should say "Satan created wasteland" or "Not-such-a-powerful God created wasteland".

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 8 years 47 weeks ago
#6

AIW -- 50 years? Try 130. Mr. Diesel was telling Mr. Rockefeller about a new engine he built that would consume less fuel. He was telling Mr. Rockefeller about this great invention in the late 1800's when he was on a cruise. 10 days later he was found floating in the ocean (dead of course). This story comes from Dylan Ratigan in his book "Greedy Bastards".

Mark Saulys's picture
Mark Saulys 8 years 47 weeks ago
#7

Here in Chicago we had 18 below. As late as the late '80s we routiinely had 30 below before the wind was factored in about 5-10 days a year.

For every record low there are 10 record highs.

Kend's picture
Kend 8 years 47 weeks ago
#8

If we truly believe the world is warming we would be working harder to convert cars from gasoline to natural gas. It burns much cleaner and we have plenty of it. But this is just a war on oil companies.

propaganda DAnne there has been thousands of lies on the global warming side. I am not saying the climate hasn't been changing. It has been changing for millions of years. But suggesting fracking is causing earthquakes is propaganda at its best. It works thought you bought into it.

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#9

"chuckle" - If I don't know an exact figure (be it a number of years or whatever), I tend to go conservative. Better to under-guess than overestimate. And I love the blunt, take-no-prisoners title of Dylan Ratigan's book!

Anyway I vaguely remember reading the story behind the invention of the automobile. From my 21st Century perspective, it is crazy-making to learn how conscious the decision was, to develop gas-guzzling engines rather than utilizing available alternatives such as electricity, or other kinds of fuel (like hemp, as Marc keeps emphasizing). As always, that decision was based not on what's best for society, for the environment or for the world, but on the option with the greatest potential for monopoly and profit. And I shudder to think of all the carnage and destruction we have to thank those corporate hacks for, choosing fossil fuel over other options. That same motive was behind the decision to configure cities around individually owned vehicles rather than public transportation. In both cases, private profits trumped the interests of the people, the environment and ultimately, world peace & stability.

Long as we have corporations calling the shots, this is what we get. While we are kept dependent on their products, vulnerable to gouging and extortion (and in some cases, land theft), we are forced to deal with their industrial pollution, their disasters and catastrophes, along with a steady stream of needless, unnecessary wars. Because capitalism SUCKS. Thom Hartmann acknowledges that capitalism is psychpathic at its core, and says it needs to be heavily regulated. Personally, I think it should be phased out and replaced by something better. As history clearly shows, whatever regulations are in place to keep the greedy bastards under control wind up nullified sooner or later; thus we have these eighty-year cycles of boom & bust, boom & bust... With the world population growing ever more dense while technology keeps advancing, these cycles are growing deadlier with farther-reaching consequences. Time to leave capitalism in the dustbin of history where it belongs. - Aliceinwonderland

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#10

Natural gas, Kend?! Over my dead body. You're damn right this is a war with oil companies! We have had enough of their genocidal, polluting, thieving crap. As to global warming, we know who the liars are and it's not the scientists. For you to deny that fracking causes earthquakes is a classic example of the aggressive, willful ignorance I keep harping on. You guys are nothing but quacks! You needn't waste your time denying reality to this crowd, because you won't get away with it here. - AIW

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#11
Quote Kend:propaganda DAnne there has been thousands of lies on the global warming side. I am not saying the climate hasn't been changing. It has been changing for millions of years. But suggesting fracking is causing earthquakes is propaganda at its best. It works thought you bought into it.

Kend ~ As usual it is YOU who are full of mistakes. I never said fracking causes earthquakes. I don't know that. It might. It damn sure contaminates underground drinking water. As far as I'm concerned, that's enough! I also said something is up with our climate and carbon emissions seems like a likely candidate. I also said no one knows for sure what the hell is going on. If your supposition is right, we very well may be headed toward another Ice Age. Not good for you! If I were you I'd bet on global warming. At least that is something you can do something about. If I recall my geography lessons correctly, in the last Ice Age Canada and most of the US was buried under an ice sheet thick enough to completely cover the Empire State building.

You're right about there being a lot of BS floating around about what is going on. However, the scientists I trust the most are the one's that admit they don't have a clue. At least they are being honest. It is FOX "News" and the Reich Wing Petroleum industry shills who are completely talking out of their ass and lying. I know that because they have nothing scientific to support their allegations. Like the Jet Stream they just blow hot air around. Just pure BS, well funded, and on steroids. Personally, I don't care either way. If you're right, you will be entombed below hundreds of feet of ice. If I'm right eventually my house might be covered by water. Since I'm over 70ft above sea level, that will take a long time. Wanna bet who's right now?

PhilipHenderson's picture
PhilipHenderson 8 years 47 weeks ago
#12

The Republican Party leaders have become full time merchants of ignorance. The appeal to the uninformed and misinformed. They are so used to telling lies that they have begun to believe the stories they tell. I cannot understand any coherence to their message. They seem to be against women, minorities, immigrants in general, poor people, LGTB, college students, the elderly, and anyone who is unemployed. The folks they seem to love are gun owners, billionaires, millionaires, patriots (read anyone ready to go to war at the drop of a hat) and so-called job creators (aka rich folks who collect coupons from stock dividends). They have become global warming deniers only because if they accepted science they could not continue to protect the KOCH brothers industry from regulation. This is a political (economic) battle for them; they know that global warming is occurring and could be stalled, but their major campaign donors would lose some of their profits because they would have to cap the carbon. It is convenient for the Republican Congressmen to pretend that global warming is in doubt. The rank and file are following their leaders without understanding their motives. Many people are Republicans because of their position on social issues such as abortion and stay with them on global warming because they cannot support the Democrats position on social issues. It is really crazy.

Don Graham's picture
Don Graham 8 years 47 weeks ago
#13

Effectively detoxifying our poisoned planet for the future of our children is the only issue of importance to me.

If our 1% ever decide to actually do something beside beat the "other" then, and only then, will I get involved.

I lost my mustard seed's worth of faith, and hope, when I became a "Baby Killer" for christ, country and the 1%. I have yet to see anyone generate the kind of effective action on a global, regional or national level required that will counter those trends Limits To Growth warned the world about in 1972.

Without an effective response, which was anticipated no later than 1975 by the MIT professors that authored that report, the only remaining action available to any of us is, at best, grossly unreliable and of such mythological proportions that none of the ancient gods, or current godesses, have a prayer of overcoming.

bobbler's picture
bobbler 8 years 47 weeks ago
#14

Yes conservatives, rush limbaug and donad trump are right, and the consensus of 97-percent of the worlds climate scients are all wrong.

The oil companies declared was on us, they are the attackers. Destroying our very our very environment that we need to live. And for the blind pursuit of profit of a very few, The 1-percent richest people.

This is exactly what scientists have been trying to tell us for 40 years., Think what it will mean to humans if (like the cycle before) 95-percent of all life on earth dies., humans would go the way of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

This is a hell of a thing to play russian roulette with.. If I needed life saving heart surgery, I would go with what 2;3 doctors diagnose., 97-percent of the worlds climate scientists are saying climate change is man made, and dangerous.

Historically, scientists have been ignored., A good example; when the challenger blew up, scientists warned it was too cold, but those in charge chose to ignore this warning. Think of Climate change as the earth blowing up in slow motion.

The earth has went thru five mass extinctions in the earths history. Each time (very ominous to my ears) the c02 levels rose to levels we are approaching "today."

The theory goes, once the deep ocean temp rises to a certain level, massive amounts of methane will be released. Which will kick global warming into high gear (polar cars melt, oceans rise 20-feet; FL, NY, NJ all gone, and this s only America).

That mass extinctions happened in the past, is indeed a clear indication they can happen again.. The Permian extinction (95-percent all life on earth died., lucky we are here today) event happened because of volcanic activity, the dinosaurs went extinct (as we might) from an impact from a 6-mile wide comet hiting he earth.

The bottom line, each mass extinction in history was preceded by a rise of c02, that mirrors the rise of c02 today from 100-years of burning fossil fuels.

I wish it were as easy as new sun tan beaches opening up in Alaska and Siberia.

Don Graham's picture
Don Graham 8 years 47 weeks ago
#15

Excellent response. Thank you.

I sometimes wonder if the 1% have already prepared themselves to survive the consequences of our continued poisoning of our planet. If so, they clearly have no intentions of sharing, do they?

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 8 years 47 weeks ago
#16

Just for the record...... the record also known as science, shows winter temperatures have risen greatly in recent decades in the Northern Hemisphere. Only Fox/right-wing media would have the audacity to report that the last 24 hours makes all of that data invalid. Can't have big oil pulling ads. Profit comes first....... let the grandchildren deal with the global annilhilation.

The wind chill was minus 20 here in upstate NY. I still ran on my woodland trails for an hour...out of the wind....just had to pull down my face mask and pull up my hoodie....no problem! The wood stove felt real nice though!

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#17

WOW 10-K... still out there burnin' rubber in minus-20 degrees!! I'm impressed.

Kend's picture
Kend 8 years 47 weeks ago
#18

Alice, I take it you don't have a electric stove, dryer or furnace. Because if you did you would know it burns very clean. Millions of kitchens have gas stoves burning with there children breathing it in every day because it clean and safe. Gas would at least be a good start towards cleaning up the air. It burns 10 times cleaner than gasoline.

Thats why I say liberals don't care about the air they just want to stick it to MAN.

Kend's picture
Kend 8 years 47 weeks ago
#19

Sorry DAnne. It was Alice that said fracking causes earth quakes. Relax we won't be covered in ice for at least 50 million years. You must really look after your self to worry about. We are close this year though. We have about 5 feet of snow in our yard. By the way I am down in Scottsdale AZ and can watch Fox News. They are a lot more fair than I hear you guys say. It's MSNBC that's way out there. I couldn't believe what that Harris lady said about the Romney family picture. Personally I thought it was way over the top. I hope they dont say things like that often.

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#20

Yeah right, kend, we "liberals" just want to stick it to "MAN". Right... whatever you say, kend. Like "MAN" is something separate from us... (SIGH) You're hopeless. Good night. - AIW

BMetcalfe's picture
BMetcalfe 8 years 47 weeks ago
#21

Global Warming/Climate change is both cyclical and person made. Anyone who has followed this since 1987 when I first noticed it, already knows that it manifests as hotter, shorter Summers with more humidity, and colder longer Winters. Those who THINK that everything warms up all over the world is ignorant. That includes the hosts at CoasttoCoastam who think that because we're having just colder Winters and hotter Summers dispells the "myth". NOT SO! I graduateded in 1964... and already our Science Teachers were discussing the possibiity of Global Warming due to our use of coal and oil. Now, that's expanded to fracking for Natural Gas, which damages forever our water acquifers. Scientists who are ignorning or who are totally ignorant of these globally used processes, are lying to themselves.

My mother, long-since passed away, believed that the oil we're extracting, is the lubricant which slows down the harsh crunching of the plate faults that keep to a minium the great 'quakes which are now ravaging many countries on our Earth. I don't know that she's correct, but the things she was told while in the dream states she so often had, may have been harbingers (and those of several others' ways to warn of us what we are bring to bear on our own population). And that - combined with the dimming of the sunlight because of the never-ending chemtrails, may just bring to an end the humanity of our world, and the loss of all of our wildflife, the healthiness of our crops, and our streams of clear water. Perhaps even the loss of our natural pollination propaganders, the bees. What will happen to the millions of dollars we have all invested in Solar Energy, when the sunlight is so dim, it cannot charge the solar panels and their storage units? All of our investments will be totally non-funcional when the chemtrails dim to sunlight to the point wherein the Solar Panels cannot gather enough sunlight energy to charge the Solar Panels chargers? Omnsanto and their ilk may have ways to preent them and their offspring from being affected; but what about the rest of us? Are we just to become collateral damage for the rich elite who may have found ways to protect themselves from the chaos which is about to come? And if so, will they put their own children and grandchildren out in the fields to take up the slack for all the rest of us who have fallen victim to the plague of illnesses we are all beginning to suffer? Los Angeles clinics and doctors offices right now in L.A. are FULL of people and children who are suffering sore throats, sinus infections, gastrointestinal problems - and our pets are suffering, too. So... What about the wildlife? Must they also be sacrificed for an experiment gone terribly wrong? This is NOT the flu, folks. It's coming from geo-engineering. Why are our Senators and elected Members of Congress NOT acknowledging this experiment, and doing something about it? Are they exempt, too, from the illnesses which will eventually kill all the rest of us? We're drinking it, eating it, breathing it... If the humans and animals along with the trees and bushes and pollination purveyors to be sarificed for illegimate experiments? This is CRIMINAL. How can we fight something our representatives we vote for, not listen to our please? They're working fewer days per sessions than most of us must workin a regular year. Why are we paying them to be ignornat and absent? We are not the GOP who are seemingly being affected, so what is the secret they possess? Just fear and brain damage? Maybe so...

bobbler's picture
bobbler 8 years 47 weeks ago
#22

Did someone try to say electrics lean., JEEEZZZZZ.. That's gotta be a conservative paid blogger..

Doesnt electic come fom 70-percent fossil fuels (combo platter of natural gas, coal, and oil)? This is Fracking, the stuff big money commercials are trying to tell us is clean (the thing causing ropes well water to catch fire).. Clean my as., The underground chemicals are almost certain to leech into water aquifers in just a few years (after its too late to sue probably)..

And while another 10-20 percent comes from nuclear power, while ras not a problem fogrill warming, nuclear is a very bad idea, as the nuclear disasters that happen every decade proves., the nuclear power plant may yet explode., its been burning underground fir years, with no way to stop it. Meanwhile, still dumping millions of gallons of radioactive contaminated water into the ocean,

i hope they legalize pot soon, so I can enjoy responding to onservatives.,

nora's picture
nora 8 years 47 weeks ago
#23

Am I the only one to notice that our weather has gone berserk in proportion to the use of WEATHER MODIFICATION so-called TECHNOLOGY by the military and corporations?

Willie W's picture
Willie W 8 years 47 weeks ago
#24

Some say that this last cold spell disproves global warming. I would simply throw this line of thinking right back in their face using their own simplistic reasoning that the forcast for 50 degrees this weekend in New York City proves that global warming is real.

bobcox's picture
bobcox 8 years 47 weeks ago
#25

Back in the late 50's or early 60's I read a book , "The Hunting Hypothesis" by Ardrey. In it he questioned what would be the conditions to cause a contraction in the human population leading to possibly a different human sub-species development because the necessities of survival would promote this. His conclusion was that the present Holocene period has lasted considerably longer than previous inter-glacial ages and that might indicate a possibility of another ice age coming soon. He checked with a professor of meteorologic at the Univ. of Wisconsin in Milwaukee who was interested in the “switch-over" phenomena to such an ice age.

Since the study made by the Club of Rome about the same time indicated that the maximum population carrying capacity of the earth in creating food with approximately equal distribution of calories was just slightly in excess of nine billion population and that if an ice age did occur, the contraction if food crops growing on earth would be reduced to about one-third of present level, and the current growth in population on earth indicates that withing the next twenty-five or thirty years we well have reached that maximum population on earth, even with the increase in food production since the Limits of Growth was studied, there would be much civil disorder, revolutions, and wars, decimating the population of earth in a short time period.

The professor of Meteorology indicated that the time to achieve the switchk-over to an ice age is estimated to be between thirty five and fifty years.

I checkered the pale- weather estimates published and graphed in Wikipedia. The temperatures versus time had lots of peaks and valleys. The present era is at one of those peaks.

My studies of statistics, I taught statistics at night school and used statistics in the research laboratory where I worked, indicates to me that the average temperatures would have to increase considerably above the average of such peaks illustrated in the graph to indicate a change in the earth's temperatures. Also, my study of weakener statistics gives the average temperatures reported to be based on a thirty year running average calculation. This is a very small portion of the time effects of physical stability of the earth. The earth receives it heat from the radiation from the sun. The solar system, all the planets and asteroids are moving with the sun through space in orbit around the galactic center and traveling at about 320 miles per second. Since the energy of the sunk is created by the fusion of hydrogen into heavier elements and we know that there are clouds of hydrogen in space, when the solar system passes thorough a part of space that has a higher than current hydrogen content, it is possible that the sun would increase int accretion of hydrogen fuel and therefore increase in heat . If the solar system passes through a part of space that has a higher than current levels of heavy metals that poison the fusion reaction, the heat emitted by the sun would be reduced. We do not know these factors and at present can only surmise at to their effects, the time delays and those effects upon earths temperatures.

Wikipedia also gave estimates of the temperatures of the earth with the carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere during the carboniferous period. It is estimated that the carbon dioxide content was about five times current concentrations, about 1500 Parts per Million compared with today's approximately 300 Parts per Million and the temperatures were not very significantly above current experience.

Having worked many years in research and trained in Chemistry and Physics,I am a skeptic when people assume a linear relationship between two selected assumed relationships. Linearity just does not occur in nature.

I am very much concerned about air pollution and the tendency of corporation management to ignore their contribution to poisonous, smog-filled air in their greedy search for short term profits. However, the assumed relationship between carbon dioxide and average earth temperatures is not proven in my analysis.

Blue in a Red State's picture
Blue in a Red State 8 years 47 weeks ago
#26

This is my opinion, but the Polar vortex may not be anything NEW, but the size of the area that was effected by it,was monumental! This was no different than the massive storms we see now in spring, summer and fall that have become the "new normal". They cover huge areas of the country at a time. Yes I believe it is climate change, but I am convinced that weather is now "engineered" by man. Last summer the temperature in Alaska was 94 degrees! Those folks that operate the HAARP facility in Alaska wanted some tropical weather, so they created themselves some! We are NOT at the mercy of Mother Nature, bur rather at the mercy of Corporate technologies. There is NO PLACE on Earth we can go to be safe from the radio frequency technologies. Man has never invented a weapon, in this case, a weather weapon, they have never used. We are the guinea pigs of psychopaths that have never learned to live in harmony with ANYTHING! Their only driving force is to CONTROL, everything! (Up to and including the weather!)

Dweinstein003's picture
Dweinstein003 8 years 47 weeks ago
#27

Nat Gas is worse than coal and leakage of methane is experienced at every level of the process including drilling, transporting it and storage. The Energy return on energy invested of shale oil/gas is 1:6. Traditional oil and natural gas wells are 1:100, but traditional wells are in terminal decline and a major oil discovery hasn't occured in 20-30 years.

"Shale oi and natural gas" is a retirement party for carbon not a new age" Arthur Berman, Geologist.

Brian Valentine's picture
Brian Valentine 8 years 47 weeks ago
#28

You liberal dips are never going to let facts get in the way of your Global Warming Religion, are you.

To make people believe your nonsense, shout "Denier!" as loud as you can, that might work

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 8 years 47 weeks ago
#29

bobcox: Very interest. But, given that most of the Earth is a molten glob and the only thing that separates the surface from all that heat is roughly a 30 mile crust, I wonder how much the atmosphere in which we live is influenced by the radiation from below? Thank goodness that the earth's crust is a good insulator...like a pot holder.

About the only time we are acutely aware that there is a lot of heat underneath us is when volcanoes erupt... especially when super volcanoes erupt...which hasn't happened for something like 300,000 years. In fact, super volcanoes, although they don't occur very often, can actually cause extinction of the life forms on the surface of the Earth. When the world's largest super volcano ever erupts (Yellowstone Park in Wyoming) it will most likely wipe out all higher forms of life that dwells on the surface. And current studies of Yellowstone is rather alarming.

The subterranean creatures will probably survive to start the evolutionary cycle all over again. And we will all be the fossil fuels of the future.

Meteorites or comets may one day also hit the earth and we have already had some very close calls.

And, of course, either one of those possibilities may very well be superseded by man's pollution of the earth: Radioactivity from nuclear plant accidents or nuclear, chemical, or biological warfare or increased CO2 and carcinogens in our atmosphere and water supplies from industrial and automobile pollution.

That was very interesting what you said about passing through clouds of hydrogen increasing solar accretion, "feeding the furnace", so to speak. As hydrogen is the fuel of the sun's (and all the other star's) fusion. The fusion of hydrogen makes heavier more complex elements with the result of giving off energy in the form of various kinds of radiation. But the initial instance of the fusion reaction was a result of the compaction, through gravitational attraction, of these hydrogen clouds into an area so dense that the energy created ignited the fusion process.

But, the energy emitted by the fusion process would have the tendency of preventing any incoming hydrogen from reaching the process. So how could clouds of hydrogen fuel an already occurring fusion process? The sun, or stars, would move through these clouds of lighter hydrogen atoms repelling them by the radiation emitted from the process. Yes, the gravity of the Sun would pull things toward it but the outgoing energy would tend to repel. And although the gravitational force of the Sun is great..the gravitational forces of hydrogen atoms, combined with distance, are so miniscule compared to the out going forces of the energy emitted...I suspect that the sun would never actually be affected by hydrogen clouds. ie: they could not actually "feed the furnace" and so therefore could not increase energy reaching the earth.

The distant hydrogen clouds would, however, tend to block or obscure some of the energy traveling through space so that the recipient of that energy many light-years distant from the source would see less energy than if the clouds weren't there. But the mere 93-96 million miles between the Earth and Sun is miniscule compared to light-years distance of distant stars...and so therefore any hydrogen cloud that intersperses the Sun's energy between the Earth and the Sun would not have any affect at noticeably diminishing the energy from the Sun.

Some Nebula are gas clouds that obscure light from background sources (other stars) either by blocking (absorbing) that energy (eg: visible light as well as non visible energy) or by excitation (emitting energy as a result of excitation--ie: glowing). The Horsehead Nebula, near the belt of the constellation Orion, is an example.

But the phenomena known as Sunspots and monster Sunspots and the resulting flares may one day fry the Earth and destroy all it's inhabitants. Just ask Major Ed Dames...he'll tell you. That's why he moved to Tahiti. His remote viewing told him that the earth was going to receive a major monster flare-up that would fry the one side of the Earth facing the Sun at the time. He thought that Tahiti would be on the lee side of the flare. But, as so many religious people have sought refuge in caves thinking the end of the world was nigh, then red-faced re-emerging out of those caves, I believe that Major Ed Dames has re-emerged from his Tahiti cave once again.

It's been a long while since I listened to Art Bell or George Noory on Coast to Coast AM and haven't recently heard the ravings of people like Maj Ed Dames. But they were entertaining. Mel's hole in Oregon, I believe. Satanic voices from the world's deepest drilled hole in Siberia. The frantic caller and knocked off air from Satellite feed going dead. Some really good stuff there. Oh, yeah, and HAARP!

Although, I don't know of any scientific data that has indicated that major Sun flares has ever done major, immediate damage to life on this planet in the past except to affect genetic mutations over time.

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 8 years 47 weeks ago
#30

Brian Valentine: Ewwww! Now there's a formidable opponent...coming from the realm of the right wing crowd overpopulated with thumper believers who think the world and universe is only 5-6 thousand years old. Talk about "nonsense" and "deniers"...you anti-science believers really take the cake.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#32

Brian Valentine ~ Your rhetoric is not going to fly here. State some facts yourself of stick to your neocon blogs.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#33

bobcox and Palindromedary ~ Now that's what I want to hear--facts that make sense. One thing you both left out however, is perhaps the greatest external force on the solar system--the force imparted by the Galactic core. As the sun, planets and other stars move through space their movement is controlled by the Galactic core. These bodies don't just move in a consistent circular motion around the core; but, many oscillated up and down through the galactic center--as though at some time they were moving in a contrary trajectory and got trapped by the power field of the galactic core. They now move in a sine wave pattern that oscillates through the center of the galactic axis. When they reach their top perigee, some force--be it gravitational, magnetic, or something we haven't discovered yet--stops the motion of the bodies and reverses it. Imagine the power that stops even red giants and changes it's motion in space. That is a serious external influence on the entire solar system that should also be taken into account.

Quite frankly bobcox, I must agree with you and Palindromedary, analysing and understanding such a complex ecosystem as ours is no easy task. That is why I tend to trust the best informed amongst us; especially, when they admit they don't know.

Brian Valentine's picture
Brian Valentine 8 years 47 weeks ago
#34

YOU people are right in there with the Creationists - with the dopey faith that "everything you see proves your idea including all the contrary evidence"

Bible thumpers ought to be looking to YOU foir tips on how to make people's brains go dead and believe whatever you tell them

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#35

"Liberal dips", Mr. Valentine? Perhaps you've stumbled into the wrong blog. I suggest you find something more appropriate to your level of comprehension (and maturity). We don't need reichwing trolls like you polluting this forum. - AIW

Brian Valentine's picture
Brian Valentine 8 years 47 weeks ago
#36

Hi thanks for your reply.

Maybe you would have some luck petitioning the Government to redefine free speech?

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#37

Mr. Valentine ~ Talk all you want, I'm getting a big kick out of it. So far, three posts and "0" facts without any arguments. So far we've stated more facts to back up your arguments then you. Criticise without facts all you want; but, be aware that you are just pushing around more hot air than that freak vortex on the North Pole. Say, perhaps you are the cause of Global Warming? Maybe if you neocons could all close your mouths for a couple of days the weather might return to normal.

Mark Saulys's picture
Mark Saulys 8 years 47 weeks ago
#38

Kend, the thousands of lies by oil company PR that you bought into (or, much more likely, are paid to propagate) were designed to resist going to natural gas - which would necessarily be a step to cleaner renewables as natural gas has many of its own problems, extraction methods as fracking, the reports about which there is no reason to doubt the credibility of (unless you have a vested interest in discrediting them). Why do you think there is not a great effort to convert cars to other fuels (and better, more environmentally sound ones, than natural gas; there's NO reason or attempt to power cars with natural gas).

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#39

Marc, to Mr. V: "Maybe if you neocons could all close your mouths for a couple of days the weather might return to normal". Hah-hah! MY turn for a belly laugh! - AIW

Mark Saulys's picture
Mark Saulys 8 years 47 weeks ago
#40

Valentine, you got anything substantive to say? A new, creative superficial shilling method of pot shots empty of any essence or content will only impress your supervisors at the big business serving PR firm so much.

How are you not the creationist? You ally yourself with a small fringe element of the scientific community and their denial and ignore OVERWHELMING evidence in the proferring of your argument.

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#41

I came within a hair's breadth of flagging Mr. V. He's just a know-nothing troll, the perfect example to illustrate why I avoid so many blogs! I've had my fill of his ilk. They've nothing better to do than sling lame, sophomoric insults at each other and engage in pissing contests. I've got very little tolerance for that. The only thing that stopped me from flagging his ass was Marc saying he got a "kick" out of it. I figured it wasn't worth depriving Marc of a little entertainment. - AIW

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#42

Aliceinwonderland ~ You're so sweet. But, please don't let me stand in your way. I didn't think that making a fool out of yourself qualified as being offensive. But then offensiveness is in the eye of the offended. So, if you see fit, please, flag away. It's fine by me.

He certainly is a know-nothing troll, and as such, certainly won't be missed. I get more than enough "kicks" out of Kend.

Mark Saulys's picture
Mark Saulys 8 years 47 weeks ago
#43

Now, now. If Valentine wants to be an ass he has a right. We musn't try to be Big Brother.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#45

Palindromedary ~ Are you kidding me? Someone with those credentials can't even support their own argument? If so we're all doomed. If you ask me though, I think you're on to something. But I don't think it's the same person. I think some dumb kid got the photo and the name off the web and is posing as such in order to boost his credibility; or, perhaps damage the credibility of the real person. Obviously he is void of credibility, or knowledge in.any other way. Perhaps Mark Saulys was right in his first suspicion that it is nothing other than another big oil shill. A sock puppet using the name of a government official. You might want to email the real Brian Valentine and let him know someone is masquerading in his name. It might just be a felony offense.

Good work!

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 8 years 47 weeks ago
#46

DAnneMarc: Yes, that thought also crossed my mind as well..that someone could have used that photo and name and is posing as someone he is not. I sure wasn't very impressed at the level of indignity that was being expressed as having come from someone with anything above a high school...maybe even only a grade school education. But, who knows....if you consider that many on the right, no matter what their education level is, sound like they haven't even graduated from grade school. Of course some people have been able to skate through institutes of higher learning by money and influence.

I suppose that only those in charge of this web site would know just who this guy really is....not that they would tell us, of course. But, I wonder what Thom Hartmann would think about this possible "spokesman" for that right wing organization actually participating in his blogs and sounding so uneducated...hurling unprovoked epithets like that. On the other hand maybe he just had too much to drink...who knows? I wonder if Thom would like to have this guy on his show sometime. I'm sure he would embarrass himself...but then they just don't seem to be embarrassed by any of the foolish positions they take or things they say. I urge everyone to go to that link and I'm sure the organization will be quite familiar to many people. Also, it was interesting checking out all the endorsements..click on About then Endorsements where you will find what looks like all Republicans or Libertarians..including Grover Norquist.

DAnneMarc's picture
DAnneMarc 8 years 47 weeks ago
#48

Palindromedary ~ Thanks for that link. Wow! What a load of nonsense. No facts. No experiments. No expert opinions whatsoever. As they say, "No nothin"! It seems clear now that the entry above could very well be a drunken version of the real thing. Not that drunk, either!

It seems that the incessant stuttering during the lecture might indicate either unreasonable nervousness or a deliberate intent to mislead. The latter would also explain a drinking disorder. The gist of the lecture was basically "it isn't known," "what is known is inconclusive," and "to learn more would cost too much money." What a load of primo BS. Not once was any study by climatologist mentioned. Not once was any historical geological facts brought up. Not once was any charts, numbers, or climate models introduced. Listening to this guy you would think the entire scientific community didn't exist. In fact, the entire lecture had about as much facts as the posts above. Unbelievable! I learned more watching Howdy Doody as a child. In a way, I feel sorry for the guy...

Palindromedary's picture
Palindromedary 8 years 47 weeks ago
#49

DAnneMarc..yes, I do too....but not too sorry...afterall...their idiotic position stands in the way of the survival of many of the species of planet Earth and making many humans suffer in the interim.

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 8 years 47 weeks ago
#50

After reading Mr. Valentine's science-bashing screed on that Amazon page, I posted this response:

Mr. Valentine, with all your colorful rhetoric about "green slop" ad nauseam you simply identify yourself as a hack with some sort of an agenda. Everything you accuse the "enviors" [translation: environmentalists] of can easily be recognized in the antics of people like yourself. Makes me wonder how much money you might be receiving from the Kochs or their ilk, for promoting this quackery. Perhaps you should find another hobby more fitting to your intellectual limitations. And while you're at it, you can cease your sophomoric harassment of my friends on Thom Hartmann's blog.

Hah-HAH! That oughta get his undies in a knot. Couldn't have done it without ya Palin... - Aliceinwonderland

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Today, we are closing Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"In an age rife with media-inspired confusion and political cowardice, we yearn for a decent, caring, deeply human soul whose grasp of the problems confronting us provides a light by which we can make our way through the quagmire of lies, distortions, pandering, and hollow self-puffery that strips the American Dream of its promise. How lucky we are, then, to have access to the wit, wisdom, and willingness of Thom Hartmann, who shares with us here that very light, grown out of his own life experience."
Mike Farrell, actor, political activist, and author of Just Call Me Mike and Of Mule and Man
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"With the ever-growing influence of corporate CEOs and their right-wing allies in all aspects of American life, Hartmann’s work is more relevant than ever. Throughout his career, Hartmann has spoken compellingly about the value of people-centered democracy and the challenges that millions of ordinary Americans face today as a result of a dogma dedicated to putting profit above all else. This collection is a rousing call for Americans to work together and put people first again."
Richard Trumka, President, AFL-CIO
From Screwed:
"If we are going to live in a Democracy, we need to have a healthy middle class. Thom Hartmann shows us how the ‘cons’ have wronged this country, and tells us what needs to be done to reclaim what it is to be American."
Eric Utne, Founder, Utne magazine