Yeah, me either.
-
My[Confined]Space
Better Than Bread
Movies Coming Soon- Star Trek Books
- “Star Trek: Voyager: 16 Seven Of Nine” Review by Deepspacespines.com
- Nana Visitor Joins Us to Talk About Her New Book – Star Trek: Open a Channel: A Woman’s Trek!
- Out Today: “Star Trek #26”
- Star Trek Strange New Worlds Asylum Book Review
- John Jackson Miller Books Ranked!
- “Star Trek: The Next Generation: Headlong Flight” Review by Lessaccurategrandmother.blogspot.com
- Jumping into Adventure with “Into the Void”
- Happy 2024 Birthday to Jim Johnson!
- “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: Asylum” Review by Trek.fm
- Beadle & Grimm Interview With StarTrekBookClub.com
- Movie Related Products
- “Deadpool & Wolverine” Review
- Kevin Smith Is Getting Closer and Closer to Dogma 2
- “The Garfield Movie” Review
- Disney Said to be Considering a Surprising Replacement for Bob Iger: EA CEO Andrew Wilson – IGN
- Amazon Is Shutting Down Freevee, Its Ad-Supported Video Streamer
- “Breathe” Review
- “Transformers One” Review
- Captain America: Brave New World | Official Trailer
- Marvel Studios’ Thunderbolts* | D23 Brazil Special Look | In Theaters May 2, 2025
- Mattel apologizes after mistakenly printing porn site on ‘Wicked’ movie dolls packaging | CNN Business
- Music Video DB
Neither do I it was snowing in December and it supposed to snow again this this week and get down in the low 20’s by tonight. Oh, and I’m in Houston (unheard of).
what your describing is exactly what global warming theories posit: that weather will change in drastic and unheard of and unexpected ways. storms like katrina becoming common place, odd temperature changes, and ranges of temperature changes being the norm.
I remember a few months ago in oct/nov that it was in the 70s one day and nearly 100 the next, and then a day later back down to the 70s.
Houston =/= global
on friday it is supposed to be colder in Houston than it is in Antarctica
www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/6798661.html
That’s because its summer in the Southern Hemisphere. duh.
Hah! xD
You do realize that that supports, not contra-indicates, the “global warming*” theory, right?
*i.e. what scientist really call it, which is increases global weather variability due to a slow increase in overall average global temperature, which has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt, and the only arguable point is how much of it has been caused by human actions.
It’s not that I don’t believe in global warming, I am educated enough to know that climate change is a part of nature. Remember 10-20 years ago when everyone thought there was another ice age coming?
ps. I also know that pollution = bad.
“Remember 10-20 years ago when everyone thought there was another ice age coming?”
Please provide two reputable, primary sources.
Do you not know how to Google? Look it up yourself.
BTW, it was the mid 1970’s not the 1980’s, so say 30 years ago.
The positive existential proclamation bears the burden of proof. This is why a prosecutor must prove a crime was committed and then who committed the crime. The logical default for the positive premise that a crime has been committed is not “yes” or even “maybe” but “no.” If I loudly proclaim that I have an invisible dragon in my garage, the logical default for the proposition, barring evidence, is “no.”
So provide two reputable, primary sources.
(Bonus points to anyone with the motivator). 😉
Paul makes a good point about burden of proof. But more directly, I did google. All the sources I found said you’re wrong. To quote wikipedia: “This hypothesis had little support in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of press reports that did not accurately reflect the scientific understanding of ice age cycles, and a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s.”
I was giving you a chance to show that you knew what you were talking about, but you’ve failed at that.
Reboot is right. The 70s cooling meme was a media phenomenon.
The real problem is that whenever you are not actually *in* an ice age, you are going into an ice age. If you look at the planet’s past, you see a cyclical pattern of slowly dropping in global temperatures for hundreds of thousands of years, eventually falling into the threshold of what scientists call and “ice age,” followed by a brief (tens of thousands of years, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands getting there) ice age, and then a rather rapid recovery, and then again followed by a slow drop into the next ice age.
Note that none of that is relevant, because the current trend totally upsets this history, and people who do not believe humans have an effect on global climate have no particularly good theory on what natural forces could cause this upset right when we’re all talking about it and no other time in history.
To quote a friend of mine, “Let me get this straight, part of global warming is cooling? What are you on?!” I so agreee with him, global warming is a scham.
Your friend is an idiot, too then.
that is the dumbest thing you could have possibly said. A friend of yours is completely ignorant of all reasonable facts and logic surrounding this “debate*”, and you defer to his reasoning? Talk about not taking responsibility for your own political reasoning.
*by which we mean the adults have all accepted reality, and the petty whiners have tried to drum up controversy where none exists.
i want to believe in climate-gate, just so my irrational hatred of Al Gore is justified.
The guy is an egotistical megalomaniac. You don’t need to disbelieve global warming to not have a high opinion of the guy. Kinda like Richard Dawkins, even the people who call him an ally hold him at arm’s length.
What a load of bollocks. Apparently it’s ‘cool’ to hate Dawkins now, I see it all of the time but never any justification.
“It’s really cold in my own tiny part of the world at this very moment, so how can global temperatures be rising?”
It’s these fools who can’t tell the difference between climate and weather that make this debate so goddamn unbearably stupid.
Why does everybody think “global warming” is even a thing? It’s been YEARS since they realized that was a stupid name that doesn’t describe what’s happening. They call it “global climate change” now, which is also stupid because it is also not properly descriptive. What we’re observing would be better described as “global climate extreming”, as the hot times get hotter, the cold times get colder, and the weather gets rougher. That’s obvious through simple observation even to slickrick, who tried to use unseasonably cold weather in Houston as an argument AGAINST this phenomenon, when it’s actually a perfect DEMONSTRATION of it. The question of whether it’s caused by people or if it’s just the planet doing its thing is another issue altogether.
TL;DR: Weather’s OBVIOUSLY getting funky, regardless of what you call it. But it’s not necessarily our fault.
I don’t believe in “the natural cycle of the planet”
Whether it’s our fault or not — and certainly the desertification of the World has be going on for ~7,000 years and increasing at an exponential rate — we have the intelligence and technology to stop and even reverse Global Climate Change. Sitting on our hands and hoping Jeebus saves us while Earth becomes a planet that can barely support human life at even a fraction of our current population is completely brain-dead.
But, whatever. Drill baby drill!
From what I’ve learned: Mars has two cars, and they’re both electric; yet, its weather is also changing established pattern.
Humans my contribute in part, but, whatever is the cause of the change, I doubt it’s us.
The asteroid wasn’t the dinosaurs’ fault either. What difference did that make?
Thank you for acknowledging my point.
Mars is in a part of its orbital pattern where it was closer to the sun and its ice cap was pointed towards the sun, causing the cap to dissipate.
Yeah, ’cause dramatically changing the composition of the atmosphere couldn’t possibly do anything, right?
Are you trying to tell me that the same people who can’t tell me what the weather is going to be like in 3 weeks, can somehow tell me what the weather is going to be like in a year?
Quote from somewhere, possibly here.
Weather =/= climate.
Long term global trends are easier to predict than local short term weather.
The weather on a given day, kind of like economic indicators, can be modeled by an equation that has so many standard errors built into the equation, that the result approximates random guessing.
The equation that posits global warming has exactly one standard error rate, and it only varies in the severity: Carbon dioxide (and other “greenhouse gases”) transmits photons in the visual spectrum, but absorb photons in the infrared spectrum (rough translation: an increase in these gases does not stop light from coming through our atmosphere and hitting the Earth, but does increase the planet’s ability to capture that light in the form of heat). This is so unbelievably obvious to anyone with even a remote understanding of chemistry that the fact that we are debating this is beyond stupid that it is hard to look at conservatives who otherwise we might have a meaningful discussion with about how we have differing priorities, might look at a situation with differing moral theories regarding personal responsibility, etc. etc., but instead we look at them and think, “you’re so stupid you believe ‘global warming’ is a convoluted hoax perpetrated by hundreds of thousands of individuals for no real purpose except to thwart conservatives.”
This is why you lose every election that doesn’t involve people being pants pissing scared of Muslims.
“Are you trying to tell me that the same people who can’t tell me what the weather is going to be like in 3 weeks, can somehow tell me what the weather is going to be like in a year? ”
why yes. just like sociologists can’t tell you want an individual will do in any given situation, they CAN tell you what a large group of people will do.
also, I doubt that your weatherman’s been really really wrong about something, usually people say what you said when they don’t properly understand risk likelihoods. Like when they say there’s a 50% chance of rain, they’re not saying that you personally have a 50/50 chance of getting rained on, but that there’s a 50/50 chance that there may be rain somewhere in their viewing area, which is usually a huge regional subset of the weather system.
I am in Houston too – it’s been pretty cold here and snowed in early December – something has to be up. Last summer was so freaking hot – hotter then usual. Also, check out all the idiot comments on the chron.com when they are reporting weather and these dumb hicks says “It’s cold – there is no global warming. AlGore bla bla bla.”
2 reliable sources? Here are a pair of articles published in the mid 70’s in time and newsweek, YMMV if they are reliable or not.
www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html
sweetness-light.com/archive/newsweeks-1975-article-about-the-coming-ice-age
Without even arguing about reliability, Newsweek and Time are not primary sources.
NYC had some awesome snow storms in the 70s. I remember packing down the snow on our front porch and stairs to slide down…right into the street.
Pizza is awesome.
Is it real? Yes.
Do I care? No.
Do we need to do something about it? Yes.
Why? So we can dump shitloads of money into fusion power and battery technology and tell our Saudi overlords to fuck off.
If you sit in a running car in a closed garage for an hour, what you don’t see will kill you. If millions of us drive our cars for an hour every day, year after year, one might conclude similar results. As a 7 year owner of a Civic hybrid ulev (43.7 life-time mpg), I will suffer the same fate as everyone. The difference is I voted for a change with my dollars, with the side benefit of breaking even at the 3.5 year point.
You effect your environment whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
I believe in Harvey Dent.
Big mistake; huge mistake.
Two Face