Global warming activists predicted that children would grow up, never knowing what snow is . . . by 2005. Blame yourselfs leftists. Stop with your doomsday predictions and scare tactics.
@sp3cia1ist Look up tornados, you need hot and cold air masses coming together. If we would put more and more carbon in the air, we could eventually get rid of the cold air in a couple million years but until then we'll have tornados
@sp3cia1ist The tornados are due to the extended cold temperatures, not warming my foolish GW Its quite hilarious, first the Global Warmists say you cant look at the day to day weather forecasts to disprove GM, but they use a day of tornadoes to prove GM Its so like the liberals to say one thing and then do the exact thing they just said you shouldnt, Double minded men are unstable in all their ways.
(1) The US is not the world, it's less that 5% of the world.
(2) Warm air causes more evaporation, thus more moisture in the air, this more falling, thus more snow. At least it will be snow until the cold temperature raises 20 degrees.
@NooneHere9p4 stop calling it climate change and global warming there are alot of places that get snow climate change happens everyday in michigan one day its 50degrees and the next day its 65
It's hilarious how people view one winter event in an isolated part of the world as proof that anthropogenic climate change isn't occurring. No, it doesn't prove shit. It's called the northeastern United States in January.
It's actually a global cooling due to lack of sun spots. They can say it's man made so they have an excuse to make us pay a global carbon tax. It's all a hoax to get more money out of the people. The earth has been cooling for the past 15yrs.
Global Warming is the Liberals Lie to attain total control of the Economies around the world, because liberals are about two things, Control and Lying because they cant use facts or the truth Only a fool would claim that warmer means cooler so I guess we can stop calling them liberals and call them fools If the Global Cooling people had sad that sunshine and tropical weather was proof of their theory, theyd be given meds and told to get some rest
Climate Change is a Better and More Appropriate Term than Global Warming.
To offset the SuperHot Summers in the American North East the Winters starting with late December to early to Mid February will counterbalance the Extreme Heat of the Summer by having Super Cold and Heavy Snows in the Early to Mid Winters. The Salt in Seawater which acts to Moderate the Water Temp is Diluted by the Glacial Melting. Salted Water acts like AntiFreeze and keeps the Temps in the Middle That Func. is Failing
Global Warming is NOT man made. The global warms and cools over tens and hundreds of thousands of years. Wasn't there an ice age way back then. My guess is the ice caps will melt, then a few thousand years go by and another ice age and then thaw so on.
@MrSuperpat i can believe that considering the vicious and prolonged cold spell in the uk. it appears the cold air was squeezed south by the increasingly energetic tropical airmass pushing into the arctic. this is consistent with model predictions and it being the hottest yr on record
we've royally balls things up. and ppl are still driving everywhere. fcking morons
Every location is affected differently... we have had the coldest day in November (Seattle) history, and we have also had the hottest ever. It's all based on averages over long periods of time. Glaciers and other features relevant to temperature that have existed for long periods of time can be used as a tool to see a long term trend, It's all about the long term observations/measurements over the entire world averaged out. No one locations measurements would help.
This dude doesn't have a clue of what he is talking about. If he would be even slightly funny it could still be acceptable, but no. This just is a big fail.
THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST UNDERRATED TRUTHS. climate change makes sense, not necessarily "global warming". global climates have been erratic, not necessarilly warm all over the place. parts of the world practically had their coolest summers.
And what about those hackers who leaked out emails between professors who were knowingly tweaking data to fit a "global warming" pattern.
the earth's temp. has increased, but the atmosphere temp is significantly less.
@emphaticdunker "And what about those hackers who leaked out emails between professors who were knowingly tweaking data to fit a "global warming" pattern."
Well they got investigated and found they werent' "tweaking" data
Not that you will here this from deniers. Scientists part of some vast conspiracy is just too appealing to them then the truth.
@leloodallasmultipass The funny thing is "climate change" was coined by conservatives to make the issue seem less serious, but it's actually more appropriate.
@leloodallasmultipass It was called "Global Warming" because it was warmer than before. Then they saw that it was actually changing in multiple places in different ways, so the scientists renamed it "Global Climate Change." But that's a stupid thing to project, because climate always changes.
@leloodallasmultipass ... The problem is the increase of the average GLOBAL temperature. So, yes, it is "Global Warming." Global Warming and Climate Change are two different things.
these people are going to claim that the climate is cooling no mater how long the cold goes on.
the climate is made up from the weather over a long time, you cant ignore parts of the weather and just talk about the kind that backs up global warming.
There's no evidence of climate change where I live. The climate is still spot on and seasonal temperature averages fall within normative values. We've had a warmer than usual autumn, but that's about all. The weather in my neck of the woods has actually been absolutely perfect in every sense for most of the last 12 months.
@bannol Regionally, climate change may not be noticeable or may be even more extreme than the gradual global change.
Climate change scientists tend to try to prove their theories with short term models, which is pretty ridiculous, it will become apparent (if true) over decades not over a hot summer.
@KrakDag in that case, global warming is like saying americans are going to starve in the future because statistics show they eat less than they did in 1990.
or it is like ignoring fat people in statistics when saying people in the third world are starving.
@KrakDag Its kinda like say President Bush was a bad president and ignoring the fact that he served as the largest Civil right defender.of the modern day. 20 years from now mothers will tell there daughters in both Iraq and afghan that they earned the right to vote through president GW policies.
December 2009 was the Second Snowiest on Record in the Northern Hemisphere. Beijing was hit by its heaviest snowfall in 60 years, and Korea had the largest snowfall ever recorded since record keeping began in 1937. Plus all of Britain was recently covered by snow.
Oranges are freezing and millions of tropical fish are dying in Florida, there are Record low temperatures in Cuba and thousands of new low temperature records being set in the USA as well as Europe.
OH but wait...we can't even eat...because that would be hurting the animals and kiling them! We can't do that either. So what's it gonna be? Life or death. Oh I get it, you want it in the middle. No power, polution, but drinking water and food. Well, you want that, but I guarantee you mankind taking away all that away, it STILL will not take away what it's doing now...wait...now scientists are saying its COOLING. Oh lord, you know what humans do? FOLLOW! Global warming is a RELIGION!
Ok, hippies. I have a solution. We can all eat vegetables, live in mud huts, use our hands to hunt. Use nothing for clothing, because we can't use wood because wood is from trees, we can not have technology and cars. We don't need power you're right. We can live in the dark with candles...wait...that's oil....we can't do that either cause we can't drill due to you pathetic, lower standard of living imbeciles who do nothing to but bring every creature down with you.
Global warming is nothing. Global warming has been started by liberals and the media all for one thing. MONEY. They are swarming mass rallies, they are telling us to contribute money to stop this "threat" by humans. They are telling us lies and made up propaganda to get them to believe what they want to believe and if we don't, we MUST be stupid and MUST be swayed. That's why they are still out there. EVERYONE MUST believe it to them.
Global warming is not REAL! Ahh, the human mind...
Perhaps you should limit yourself to topics about which you have some knowledge (perhaps Star Wars trivia?). Because you're just embarrassing yourself with your ignorant rants.
@ClumsyRoot Perhaps you should try to debate the issue with him, simply denying everything he said and calling it 'ignorant rants' isn't exactly a convincing argument.
To what end? Anyone who would point to examples of record snowfall and suggest that they're somehow evidence against global warming clearly has no idea what the term "global warming" actual means.
It's like debating a creationist: Most of them have a limited understanding of science, and those that do are invariably guilty of cherry-picking data to buttress their religious preconceptions.
I love how politicans and journalists debate global warming as if they know what the f*** they are talking about. People, do not listen to any of these morons when forming an opinion on the subject because not one of them including Al Gore have any idea whats going on. If you want to join the debate then get your information from a credible source. Cenk is not a credible source, he is an idiot.
"Propaganda!" Really? the 928+ scientific papers are all lies? The melting ice caps=myth?
"It snowed in the south!" Right.....Then it melted the next day. It's not like the south became a frozen tundra.
I love how so many of you clowns shout out"climate is always changing and sporadic" Yeah, no shit Sherlock, the POINT is that the gases and pollutants which WE pump into the atmosphere are speeding up the process, this major problem is not occurring NATURALLY.
If I believe correctly...all those "smart" scientists said in the 70's, we weren't going to live long enough to see the 90's if we didn't start doing something about global cooling because we were all going to die. We weren't going to live long enough because the Earth was going to be all frozen. Well...some of the scientists are the same ones today saying...we need to do something about global warming or we won't live another couple of decades.
Humor me and NAME those scientists, NAME the papers and books they have written, NAME the studies they have conducted, NAME the interviews they have done, WHERE can I see them?. WHO IN THE HELL said we wouldn't live long enough to see the 90's? Throwing out made up "facts" don't work for me. Sorry
Look in the history books. If you want to read. Look up online, back in the 1970's, 80's and 90's it was all about global cooling. You can ask an senior or your grandfather. Are you another Al Gore. I better put my sound on that only YOU can hear. BUZZZ can you hear it? hahaha
"Ha!Ha! Buzzzzz!" Ughhhh.....God, you are such a retard. Since it seems you are incredibly dumb, I'll repeat. NAME THEM. I love it when ignorant people dig up one quote such as "we'll be gone by the 90's" and then use it to prove that their argument is right. And, by the way, I don't give a rats ass what your opinion is. YOU are not a scientist, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about, and apparently disregard facts. Al Gore? Yes, asshole, I care about the environment
Global warming is pure propaganda! They see an incline in climate change over the years and they all freak out. The climate like the weather is always changing and sporadic. It always spikes up and goes down like the stock market. There is simply not enough evidence to conclude man-made global warming. I'm disappointed the way science and theory are thrown around. It's not science!
@Igo2Pattaya, real mature buddy. You're clearly the one who's being rational here... If you really had some shocking data that shows that global temps have not risen in 20 years then you would be parading all over the place instead of saying I should go look for it and insulting me for asking for something to back up your claim. I am "so interested" and I HAVE looked, and the data shows the opposite of what you are saying. Why are you so angry with me anyway?
How about the FACT that the Earths temperature has not risen in at least 20 years? How did the last ice age end? The woolly mammoths eating to much chili and farting too much? Fact, the Earth cools and warms and there is NOTHING man does to cause it or to stop it.
@Igo2Pattaya do you have any proof that the Earth's temperature has not risen in at least 20 years? You claim this is a fact so you must have some sort of data to support this claim, right? So could you provide a link to a source or something?
@DerrenBrown100 Well this is based on my own observations, but are we in agreement that the earths orbit is not a perfect circle, and can always change because of that?
Sunspot activity plays a role in global temperatures. Higher sunspot activity leads to highter temperatures on every planet in the solar system. The CO2 claim is made by politicians who have mutual gains by passing cap and trade and carbon credits.
@aspie101 THANK YOU, someone that understands what astronomers & meteorologists have been trying to tell us. The sun plays a MUCH bigger role in our climate than we do... you'd think that would be obvious. We're now seeing the sun become slightly hotter, but enough to effect us. As a star burns its supply of hydrogen it has to start burning helium created through fusion, which is a slightly "heavier" element. This causes the star to become hotter from the immense pressure of added mass.
@Macabre215 Nature has her different periods of temperature. Corrupt politicians such as Al Gore use every natural disaster as proof of global warming. If cap and trade passes, he and his cronies will use the tax money raised to purchase bigger houses, bigger private jets and bigger private yachts. It is important to take care of the environment, but corrupt politicians use environmentalist propaganda for mutual gain.
A barrel floating in the ocean will grow a seaweed farm. It would be easy to create rainforest sized algae farms mid ocean. The seaweed farms would photosynthesis, as well as the lifeforms themselves would be made of carbon.
Cheap. Proactive. Harmless.
Also mid ocean seaweed (algae) farms could be towed to counties in need for emergency food fuel.
No downside.
Build seaweed farms from shore and tow them out to sea and anchor them. Polluting companies could sponsor the low costs.
As a 20 year heating and cooling tech, I can say that last summer was the coolest sumer in 80 years (a record cool summer = record low income, So I pay more attention to this than that fool) Now this winter we had a heavy winter. (one day it snowed in 49 states!) I'm in Chicago and we still are seeing freezing temps at night and the snow won't be gone till this weekend. I like how "one snow storm doesn't prove anything" yet katrina proved global climate change. This guys a douche...
windycityjohn400 are you saying last Summer had record low temps worldwide or just in your city of Chicago? Also the same link that could exist between warming and more severe storms like Katrina would explain more powerful snowstorms as well. It's not a contradiction. More heat over oceans puts more energy/moisture into the system and can lead to more extreme storms with a lot of precipitation. But 1 or 2 storms, like Katrina or 2010 winter storms, doesn't prove anything either way.
The US had a RECORD COOL SUMMER. Coolest in 80 years.Yes, more heat over oceans= more evaporation. But rainfall cools the surface of the earth. It also takes COLD to make snow. So why don't they ever talk about that? It's a balance. They called it a hole in the ozone..till it got smaller..then it was global warming..till they discovered (the hidden truth) it had been cooling for 15 years..now they point to everyEruption/earthquake/hurricane/storm/and drought and claim it's global climate change.
windycityjohn, you keep saying it's been cooling for 15 years. Where are you pulling that statistic from? I've never heard that before. The hole in the ozone got smaller because people weren't fighting over whether it was taking place and actual changes were made to significantly reduce the amount of aerosol emissions that were causing the hole. US is still just one part of globe. When did anyone say it wouldnt be cold enough for snow by 2010 or that every region would be warmer at all times?
4TIMESAYEAR, do you even know what "not statistically significant" means? It just means that more data over more time is needed in order to make definitive conclusions based on that particular time period. It doesn't mean no warming, no detectable warming, or anything along those lines. As for your point about Iowa temps last year you are still only talking about 1 year and just the midwestern US. GLOBAL Climate is long term trends for the planet as a whole, not just where you or wcJohn live.
Climate is long term trends, but it not "for the planet as a whole" - the world does not have one single climate, but many: Climate is determined by the latitude, altitude, etc.
Climate is long term trends, but it not "for the planet as a whole" - the world does not have one single climate, but many: Climate is determined by the latitude, altitude, etc.
Comments are buried far down because they are replies to old posts. Using your dictionary definitions, "not statistically significant" means in no way of consequence to the principles of statistics (i.e. representing an overall pattern or trend). That's not the same as not significant in a colloquial sense it just means THAT DATA ALONE is not enough to make a statistical conclusion (it's only 15 years). GLOBAL climate change looks at averages of many individual climates from the entire planet.
Wow......."windycityjohn400" says "RECORD COOL SUMMER"......NASA says "second hottest year on record" and "2000s were the hottest decade on record" ........whom to believe?
Believe the guy who makes his living (or when it's cool doesn't) off the actual weather. NOT the government agency getting paid millions to push the liberal global warming agenda. How about this...stop listening to all the B.S. about temps in places you've never heard of and just look at your own thermostat! Ask a friend with a boat how much use it got last summer. Water was too cool for swimming most of the summer. Ask a plow driver if it was a good year. Record global snow cover!!!
Ah, a totally reasonable and NOT BATSHIT CRAZY response.....NASA is all a CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!
Here is a fun fact.....just b/c you 'never heard of a place' doesn't mean it doesn't exist. On Jan. 11, 2010 Melbourne, Australia had a temp of 114 F....if you had been there on that day, would global warming pass the prestigious 'windycityjohn the clueless Polack' test? I am sure NASA would be interested in that info!!!!!!!! tool.
So I supose your incapable of understanding that extremes cancel each other out. IT FUCKING SNOWED IN 49 OF 50 STATES! So if it's hot on the other side of the globe at the same time..it's a balance! Just like you saying snow in Chicago doesn't disprove global warming......heat in Australia doesn't = a global crisis. Brain washed nut jobs like you who believe statements based on false information are the TOOLS! Next year when it's NOT 114 in Melborne you'll say it's global climate change. DOUCHE
Hundreds of scientists, with access and educations from the most prestigious universities in the world, whom are experts in the field of climate, with tens of thousands of Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals.
Vs. 'windycityjohn400' with access to Thermostat instructions, educated at some shitty trade school, with dozens of 'youtube' comments.........MY GOD!!!!! CLASH OF THE TITANS!!!!!!!!
Hundreds of scientists, with access and educations from the most prestigious universities in the world, whom are experts in the field of climate, with tens of thousands of Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals. Vs. 'windycityjohn400' with access to Thermostat instructions, educated at some shitty trade school, with dozens of 'youtube' comments.........MY GOD!!!!! CLASH OF THE TITANS!!!!!!!!
Hundreds of scientists, with access and educations from the most prestigious universities in the world, whom are experts in the field of climate, with tens of thousands of Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals.
Vs. 'windycityjohn400' with access to Thermostat instructions, educated at some shitty trade school, with dozens of 'youtube' comments.........MY GOD!!!!! CLASH OF THE TITANS!!!!!!!!
@windycityjohn400 what an ignorant comment. Just focus on temperatures from last summer in the central U.S. and ignore the rest of the world as well as decades of other data? Apparently you don't understand the concept of GLOBAL CLIMATE change. You also don't seem to understand the importance of comprehensive data collection and analysis. To rehash an earlier dialogue we had, your personal thermostat observations are not statistically significant ; )
And your constant use of data that was proven to be false and manipulated by the members of the Global warming movment (as displayed in their private memos that went public and turned this debate on it's ear) proves to be comical. Who's "Science" isn't tied to large global climate change research contracts? If they say it's cooling, the funding stops! Most of the crap your spewing is theory based on man programed models that only used the top 60% warmest numbers. Clueless, Brainwashed,liberal
Windycityjohn400. First off, not once did I say that global climate change is clearly taking place and is man made. Although I think the evidence shows that it is a real concern, my comments have been towards your flawed logic, not your overall position. Weather you trust the people keeping the data or not, to outright say that the very concept of tracking worldwide trends when studying global phenomena is not necessary is just a stupid thing to say.
I didn't say that. I said I don't believe the results they are reporting. I don't believe global warming is man made, so the models of gloom and doom are based on their over blown paranoia. "If" you believe the globe is warmer, look to nearby planets that have polar melting occurring on them. That's not from our cars buddy! I'd blame a warmer cycle of solar. Those cycles are natual and will cycle cool again without the carbon taxing and man made hysteria.
You did say people should check their own thermostat and not worry about the data from "places they've never heard of". BTW Climategate quotes have been misconstrued and taken out of context as theyre gleaned from emails over 10 yrs and many topics. HIDE THE DECLINE refers to a well known abnormality in tree ring data. A TRICK just means a convenient way to do something, as in the phrase "that should do the trick" which I'm sure you've heard before. It's not something deceptive. I could go on...
You could TRY to go on....but phrasing a sentance that way is just a trick to make it seam like your point was well made and there are plenty more points you could site to further cement your statement as fact. Truth is, you can't pick and choose. When the Climategate quotes were released, they were COMPLETE MEMOS! You of course are only familiar with the Liberal Cliff notes versions. Tell me...are you hotter today that 10 years ago on this date where you are? Is the ocean in your basement yet?
Uh no. It wasn't to get away from actually having to say more, I ran out of characters douche. I'll give more examples if you want. I know the email/memos were complete but a couple phrases were carefully selected and taken out of context like "hide the decline" and "Mike's nature trick". Did anyone say Philadelphia would be under water by 2010? I don't recall that being the case. By the way I do feel like temperatures throughout the year have been warmer lately than I remember 10 years ago.
SEE! I stumped you already. Those 2 little sentances are the only ones from the liberal playbook you bothered to remember. If your in Philly and didn't think this past winter was a whopper...than your not only drinking the global warming cool-aid, you must be drinking it straight from Al Gore's cock! My brother In-law runs a 1/4 Maine's plow truck fleet. The east coast got snow this winter you you've got dumb ideas! You and AL, Go watch "Inconveniant Truth" and jerk off. Liberal dumbass. LMFAO.
Wow you are more immature than I thought. How did you stump me? WTF are you talking about? I was defending 2 particular allegations made by people like you, dumbass. If you want to talk about another example from the emails then just say which one and I'll discuss it. But you won't because you are a dimwitted coward. Yea we got a lot of snow in Philly. It didn't snow every day, it was a few MONSTER STORMS. We just had another one last weekend but guess what, it was a shit ton of rain.
ummmm.......... it's March? You were expecting something else? I guess 4timesayear's comments are just as screwy as mine, right? Go to bed, you sould have work in the morning. Or is mom letting you stay up late tonight?
Yes, windycityjohn it's March, so temps are generally warm enough for precipitation to fall as rain. Just like in January and February it was cold enough for snow. Were you expecting something else then? It only has to be below about 33-34F (<32 in the clouds) on the surface for snow to fall. The same thing (moisture) that causes a lot of snow in winter causes a lot of rain in spring and summer. Understand? Comments r burried far down because they are replies to an older original comment.
Ok...so it rained. Big deal. Was it too much?Too little?Too much,Too soon? You had snow in the winter. I guess it was all just what you expected. Still not sure if you think you got more or less than you planed on. I don't know you or your age or level of education. Me, I'm 40. 20 years making a living off the weather. HVAC TECH. Extended family history....Almost all farmers going back to the Mayflower. (yes my tree traces that far) My experience says. No Global threat. Don't worry, be happy.
You are missing my point about the last big storm being rain. The point is that the unusual amount of snow this winter was not caused by an equally unusual amount of cold, it was caused by a few large moisture systems that coincided with temps below 32F in the 2 coldest avg months of the year (Jan/Feb). BTW I'm a 26 year old Law student who majored in meteorology briefly at Penn State. I don't doubt your expertise in Chicago local temps but Global Climate is much broader than that.
For the last time...I'm not talking about just Chicago! What part of It's NEVER been cold enough for us to have it snow in 49 of the 50 states at the same time don't you get? We set 1047 weather related records country wide this winter! You hear about large chunks of ice falling into the sea, and the media sucks you into thinking it's from melting. The chunk that fell off that was as big as Manhattan was PUSHED into the sea by the massive force of all the NEW ice up hill from it. It's Glacial!
WCJohn that point was referring more to the recored amounts of snow this year not the extent of snow cover. There was an unusually high amount of large moisture-rich systems this winter that coincided with a cold wave which is why snow covered such a large swath of the country. Since the snow fell in such large quantities it stuck around longer and the amount of states with snow on the ground kept tallying up. P.S. I'm not an alarmist and I don't rely on mainstream media for my information.
It's not just Chicago, but Iowa as well-and not just the summers, but the winters. A year ago we had a winter rated #32 out of 136yrs of record-keeping. I couldn't shut my furnace off until the middle of June; I believe the year before that it was one week into June. This winter is beating that one. They are also starting sooner; we had our first snowfall Oct 10 with temps in the 20's.
So you see, we're not just talking about a single snow storm, but a long term pattern that's emerging.
Do you pay close attention to the weather all over the world? Its called global warming because its a rise in average temperature over the entire world; not the USA in particular.
Actually data shows that the weather has been cooling down for the past 15 years... By the way since when does that dude have a doctorate in environmental sciences?
Emanouche, I'd like to see that data. According to a recent interview with Phil Jones he discussed that there has been a .12C/decade warming trend in the last 15 years but it fell just short of statistical significance for that time period, i.e. more data is needed outside what was recorded in those 15 years in order to make any conclusions.
So many so called scientists blowing the global warming horn are proven to not even be scientists. Much of the reports for global warming are not even peer reviewed. Fact that it snowed instead of rain in areas that normaly do not get snow means it is warmer? Might want to look into all the fraud with data before you claim this is the warmest decade ever, they have caught "scientists" only using the warmest 60% of total temps. If you use the warmest temps you must also use the coldest!
TheCastellan - Currently, we do not have an alternative to fossil fuel. Renewable technology is costly, unreliable and the end product, pricey. Fossil fuel has a proven history. Its lifted us out of poverty and given us the lifestyle we all enjoy today. Its a case of fantasy versus reality.
Here's my take. Climate changes we see happening are part of an earth change cycle. Now have we as humans added to it? Yes, but to a small extent. We're just making go slightly faster.
Am I saying SUV's and stuff gonna wreck us....no....but that's no excuse to stick to fossil fuels..go to big cities out west and your nose and eyes will tell you. We need to soon tell the oil companies what they can go do to themselves.
This is what the environ-mental-cases don't want us to know about wind farms and the great numbers of protected birds that are being killed. Read the messages posted on that link below.
Watch this beautiful vulture get struck down on Youtube.
Republicans are just about as smart as you (Democrat?) Both not that bright. Prosaic. I wish to err on the side of caution re spaceship Earth. The "proof" of global warming is weak. The biggest problem is the incredibly short period time that weather data has been gathered. eg What caused the mini ice age in the 13th century in England? Greenland was called Greenland because it was actually green at the time - Was that global warming due to cows and horses??
Instead, the Corus plant in India will now be purchasing carbon credits to offset their CO2 output. The money to purchase such carbon credits offsets will be paid into a World bank which might have good intentions initially by passing on the proceeds to poorer nations but nonetheless, there is a strong possibility that some unscrupulous politicians will skim excess profits, as is usually the case. More regulation and red-tape leaves room for fraudulent activity and gains.
True, however no regulation at all leaves room for even more fraudulent/harmful activity. I agree that the far reaching impacts of legislation aimed at slowing GW must be discussed and a smart plan should be put in place that does more good than harm. However, that discussion doesn't won't take place as long as one side of the political spectrum spends all its efforts on denying that there is a problem in the first place rather than submitting alternative ideas.
sjs334 - Exactly. The reason there are Antitrust Laws in place. These laws are designed to prevent unfair competition in any form including mergers which might create monopolies which are to the detriment of the consume. Just ask Bill Gates and Microsoft what he thinks about these laws :) Politicians in the West have been pushing to pass new regulations on AGW for quite a while now.
now if we can slap that against the fossil furl companies. I mean why do people who come up with a way to get away from fossil fuels tend to meet a nasty end?
and anyone saying big oil and coal are honest and innocent will have me pulling an abdominal muscle from intence laughter.
sjs334 - Only when the CRU emails emerged did politicians decide to take another look at the evidence. Had it not been for these emails, the new carbon laws would have passed without a hitch. MSM kept mum on the subject and pushed AGW all the way. Which, if I may add, is totally unjust and unfair.
Though, since then a lot has changed and this is why big business is now supporting the AGW cause. They stand to gain handsomely from the sale of carbon credits as was the case with the Corus Steel plant in the UK which sold out to Tata Steel in India and will therefore be belching out more CO2 than previously, besides real pollutants, since it won't have to adhere to strict EU emission laws.
Had it been otherwise, we would have more than welcomed a breakaway from fossil fuel exporting nations and the necessary private investment would have flowed in uninterrupted and without the need for government intervention.
But the worse thing about a tax on CO2 is that it will impoverish people further as a result of rising prices on virtually every manufacture good imaginable. Renewables technology hasn't yet arrived to the point of the reliability we expect, excessive equipment cost and ultimately more expensive electricity.
sjs334 - Absolutely, I'd suspect oil companies of lobbying their way through anything to get their way. Just like the drug companies did with avian and swine flu. They raked in billions in profits for a flu which never came. Now governements, even here in Malta, are stuck with large stocks which nobody is willing to take as a result of some deaths from the innoculation itself.
I could actually listen to what this clown had to say if over the last ~5 years every AGW hoax denier on every newscast hadn't refered to every hot day and every other weather event as proof of AGW.
The only reason the AGW hoax got any traction at all is because of a few successive mild winters so live by the sword die by the sword.
I live in Malta, an island where the population density is listed 7th on the world stage. Two fifths of the island is uninhabited and used primarily for agriculture and leisure. Had you to apply the same population density as Malta's to the world population of 6.7 billion, you'd fit them comfortably in Australia.
It is the economy which dictates population size. This will also halt the migration of millions of poor Africans seeking a better life abroad. Unknown to many, Africans would rather live with their own kind than in a society composed of mainly white people and strange customs. And if you think overpopulation isn't a big lie, think again.
From a world population in1900 of 1.6 billion people with an average life expectancy of 35 to a global population of 6.7 billion and a doubling in life expectancy. That is an 8 fold increase in human life years. Oil and coal are miracles of nature and should now be used, in greater volumes than ever before, to lift the rest of the developing world out of poverty. To raise their standard of living and education to a point where they'll have smaller families, as is the case with Europe.
Furthermore, the oil and coal companies never suggested to government to increase taxes until now. Now you're all in bed together. What's for certain is that oil and coal companies, for a reasonable profit, gave us an unlimited resource by which in just 100 years, lifted the people of the western world out of poverty.
@AGWnot, Of course fossil fuels have been very beneficial to industrialized nations and we should be grateful for that. However, can you really deny that if anybody has a monetary interest in making sure people doubt GW its them? Not only do they not want to limit thier own emmissions/waste but would want people not to 'go green' because it means less demand for their product. Also, it is believed that the North Arctic ocean contains a large oil reserve only accessible bc of melting ice caps.
You'd have got the same kind of backlash the AGW camp is experiencing today. In the case of AGW, the scientists have colluded with politicians to manipulation of data for reasons which were unknown. Until now I do not know of anyone who's apologised to the 1.5 billion people living in the Himalayan areas. This is truly criminal. Its this very arrogance which proves to me without any doubt that the 'scientists' pushing AGW are wrong. True science is never settled but refined with time.
Good night. If the interviewer asked Jones why he used Mike's trick instead of a different "convenient way of doing something" then he would need to discuss it but the question was about whether 'trick' means a deceptive ploy like it does in everyday use. The fact that you fail to see the logic in what I am saying is astounding but ok.
sjs334 - Absence of logic is demonstrated in the fact that people like yourself still believe in AGW even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I hope you do understand that the question and answer session between the BBC and Phil Jones was rehearsed.
The fact that the 'trick' belongs to the discredited and deceitful Michael Mann is highly relevant.
AGWnot, I don't have some sort of dogmatic belief that AGW is a real problem nor do I have any interest in it being so. My assessment is that as of now, the evidence is in favor of it being a legitimate concern. And I feel as though the coal and oil industries have put a lot of time, money, and effort into misrepresenting the state of the science. I'm not sure what "overwhelming evidence" you speak of but I'd like to hear it. I'd also like to know what proof you have that the Q&A was not legit.
sjs334 - Law states that someone is innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, its all hearsay with respect to the fossil fuel companies misrepresenting science. Had it been the case I'd have been on the forefront of the fight against them.
They write: the benefits of scientific data being made available and thus open to scrutiny outweigh the perceived risks. To this end, scientific information should be made available on request as outlined in the Freedom of Information Act.
Royal Society of Chemistry backs sharing of data in contrast to Jones standard practice statement
1 03 2010
While Dr. Phil Jones prattles on about withholding code and data being standard practice The Royal Society of Chemistry has made a statement to the Parliamentary inquiry saying they as an organization support open data sharing. They now join the Institute of Physics in making a strong statement on the practices of UEA/CRU.
Actually, the effect has occurred in the Great Lakes area. They haven't noticed there because that's the pick up point. The dumping point was here on the Eastern Seaboard.
Why is that interesting? If "trick" is a commonly used term in statistical analysis then he doesn't need to specifically mention Michael Mann while explaining the accepted definition of trick in this context. Right?
AGWnot - The question was "In the e-mails you refer to a "trick" which your critics say SUGGESTS you conspired to TRICK THE PUBLIC?..."
He was answering the question asked by clarifying that 'trick' in that sense is not something deceptive but rather "a convenient way of achieving something". Can't you see that there is no need to mention which particular "convenient method" he used? It's irrelevant to the question that was asked, as is the frequency at which Mike's specific trick is used.
"Does Winter Snow Disprove Global Warming?"
Since when is it anyone's duty to disprove anything?! The onus is on those who bring the claim. Anyone who implies otherwise is a fool or a liar.
Now, who pays these Young Turks?
AnotherGlenn 1 month ago
Global warming activists predicted that children would grow up, never knowing what snow is . . . by 2005. Blame yourselfs leftists. Stop with your doomsday predictions and scare tactics.
Protege385 7 months ago
@sp3cia1ist Look up tornados, you need hot and cold air masses coming together. If we would put more and more carbon in the air, we could eventually get rid of the cold air in a couple million years but until then we'll have tornados
JesusNonEnviromental 10 months ago
@sp3cia1ist The tornados are due to the extended cold temperatures, not warming my foolish GW Its quite hilarious, first the Global Warmists say you cant look at the day to day weather forecasts to disprove GM, but they use a day of tornadoes to prove GM Its so like the liberals to say one thing and then do the exact thing they just said you shouldnt, Double minded men are unstable in all their ways.
JesusNonEnviromental 10 months ago
Two things:
(1) The US is not the world, it's less that 5% of the world.
(2) Warm air causes more evaporation, thus more moisture in the air, this more falling, thus more snow. At least it will be snow until the cold temperature raises 20 degrees.
NooneHere9p4 11 months ago
@NooneHere9p4 stop calling it climate change and global warming there are alot of places that get snow climate change happens everyday in michigan one day its 50degrees and the next day its 65
YoUB3TrOlLiN 10 months ago
It's hilarious how people view one winter event in an isolated part of the world as proof that anthropogenic climate change isn't occurring. No, it doesn't prove shit. It's called the northeastern United States in January.
NashvilleKildCountry 11 months ago
It's actually a global cooling due to lack of sun spots. They can say it's man made so they have an excuse to make us pay a global carbon tax. It's all a hoax to get more money out of the people. The earth has been cooling for the past 15yrs.
leebog31 1 year ago
Global Warming is the Liberals Lie to attain total control of the Economies around the world, because liberals are about two things, Control and Lying because they cant use facts or the truth Only a fool would claim that warmer means cooler so I guess we can stop calling them liberals and call them fools If the Global Cooling people had sad that sunshine and tropical weather was proof of their theory, theyd be given meds and told to get some rest
JesusNonEnviromental 1 year ago
Climate Change is a Better and More Appropriate Term than Global Warming.
To offset the SuperHot Summers in the American North East the Winters starting with late December to early to Mid February will counterbalance the Extreme Heat of the Summer by having Super Cold and Heavy Snows in the Early to Mid Winters. The Salt in Seawater which acts to Moderate the Water Temp is Diluted by the Glacial Melting. Salted Water acts like AntiFreeze and keeps the Temps in the Middle That Func. is Failing
Roadracer987654321 1 year ago
Global Warming is NOT man made. The global warms and cools over tens and hundreds of thousands of years. Wasn't there an ice age way back then. My guess is the ice caps will melt, then a few thousand years go by and another ice age and then thaw so on.
elgato105 1 year ago
@sonicboom371 are you proud of that well thought out, measured and educated response?
supernerd767 1 year ago
But the Globalists, who spread this propaganda, themselves do not believe the CO2 myth!
With the chem-trails they fight the Sun, not CO2.
What in The World Are They Spraying? on Vimeo
vimeo[dot]com[slash]16219493
only2percent 1 year ago
Those who vote "For it" are asking for more slavery and more deaths.
Haven't you had enough, already?
Why it becomes SUDDENLY MUCH colder, when a cloud hides the Sun?
If their "science" was true, would you be able to refute it with this single everyday experience?
No gas can compete with vacuum, surrounding Earth, in keeping temperatures.
Why did they choose CO2?
Ask any lawyer, if he/she will sue anyone/anything, that has nothing to give ...
only2percent 1 year ago
Real scientists are now saying a mini Ice Age is possible.
MrSuperpat 1 year ago
@MrSuperpat i can believe that considering the vicious and prolonged cold spell in the uk. it appears the cold air was squeezed south by the increasingly energetic tropical airmass pushing into the arctic. this is consistent with model predictions and it being the hottest yr on record
we've royally balls things up. and ppl are still driving everywhere. fcking morons
andy765gtr 1 year ago
LMAO Check the title..what dipshits. LMAO LMAO
papavalium 1 year ago
Im not going to watch the video, just want to quickly give out about this title
dylanlawless1 1 year ago
Every location is affected differently... we have had the coldest day in November (Seattle) history, and we have also had the hottest ever. It's all based on averages over long periods of time. Glaciers and other features relevant to temperature that have existed for long periods of time can be used as a tool to see a long term trend, It's all about the long term observations/measurements over the entire world averaged out. No one locations measurements would help.
sbc2k1 1 year ago
Heat wave in LA is blamed on global warming too, idiots its not LA warming, its global warming
fudgedogbannana 1 year ago
This dude doesn't have a clue of what he is talking about. If he would be even slightly funny it could still be acceptable, but no. This just is a big fail.
xtcsh 1 year ago
the great lakes are colder he kinda fumbled through lake effect snow but he did good for a guy who flies coast to coast
ajgolfer1 1 year ago
Did you know healthy people disprove diseases?
NothingBut666 1 year ago 5
just stop calling it global warming. its climate change. whoever came up with the global warming moniker just fouled up the argument.
leloodallasmultipass 1 year ago 4
@leloodallasmultipass
THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST UNDERRATED TRUTHS. climate change makes sense, not necessarily "global warming". global climates have been erratic, not necessarilly warm all over the place. parts of the world practically had their coolest summers.
And what about those hackers who leaked out emails between professors who were knowingly tweaking data to fit a "global warming" pattern.
the earth's temp. has increased, but the atmosphere temp is significantly less.
screw fox tho!!
emphaticdunker 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@emphaticdunker "And what about those hackers who leaked out emails between professors who were knowingly tweaking data to fit a "global warming" pattern."
Well they got investigated and found they werent' "tweaking" data
Not that you will here this from deniers. Scientists part of some vast conspiracy is just too appealing to them then the truth.
booley 1 year ago
@leloodallasmultipass The funny thing is "climate change" was coined by conservatives to make the issue seem less serious, but it's actually more appropriate.
AmericaDevil 1 year ago
@leloodallasmultipass Oh, they are the same people who came up with the anthropomorphic climate change moniker.
RemoteSwitch 1 year ago
@leloodallasmultipass It was called "Global Warming" because it was warmer than before. Then they saw that it was actually changing in multiple places in different ways, so the scientists renamed it "Global Climate Change." But that's a stupid thing to project, because climate always changes.
neofriends 11 months ago
@neofriends yet THAT PROCESS can change... hence the usage of "change".
leloodallasmultipass 11 months ago
@leloodallasmultipass ... The problem is the increase of the average GLOBAL temperature. So, yes, it is "Global Warming." Global Warming and Climate Change are two different things.
emantabrizi 8 months ago
these people are going to claim that the climate is cooling no mater how long the cold goes on.
the climate is made up from the weather over a long time, you cant ignore parts of the weather and just talk about the kind that backs up global warming.
btw, read up on "urban heat island".
evilblades 1 year ago
There's no evidence of climate change where I live. The climate is still spot on and seasonal temperature averages fall within normative values. We've had a warmer than usual autumn, but that's about all. The weather in my neck of the woods has actually been absolutely perfect in every sense for most of the last 12 months.
bannol 1 year ago
@bannol Regionally, climate change may not be noticeable or may be even more extreme than the gradual global change.
Climate change scientists tend to try to prove their theories with short term models, which is pretty ridiculous, it will become apparent (if true) over decades not over a hot summer.
01joydivision 1 year ago
To say winter snow disprove global warming, is like saying noone starves in the third world because there are fat people there too.....
KrakDag 1 year ago 27
@KrakDag in that case, global warming is like saying americans are going to starve in the future because statistics show they eat less than they did in 1990.
or it is like ignoring fat people in statistics when saying people in the third world are starving.
evilblades 1 year ago
@KrakDag Its kinda like say President Bush was a bad president and ignoring the fact that he served as the largest Civil right defender.of the modern day. 20 years from now mothers will tell there daughters in both Iraq and afghan that they earned the right to vote through president GW policies.
sexyjapgirl2010 1 year ago
December 2009 was the Second Snowiest on Record in the Northern Hemisphere. Beijing was hit by its heaviest snowfall in 60 years, and Korea had the largest snowfall ever recorded since record keeping began in 1937. Plus all of Britain was recently covered by snow.
Oranges are freezing and millions of tropical fish are dying in Florida, there are Record low temperatures in Cuba and thousands of new low temperature records being set in the USA as well as Europe.
JediMaster6788 1 year ago
OH but wait...we can't even eat...because that would be hurting the animals and kiling them! We can't do that either. So what's it gonna be? Life or death. Oh I get it, you want it in the middle. No power, polution, but drinking water and food. Well, you want that, but I guarantee you mankind taking away all that away, it STILL will not take away what it's doing now...wait...now scientists are saying its COOLING. Oh lord, you know what humans do? FOLLOW! Global warming is a RELIGION!
JediMaster6788 1 year ago
Ok, hippies. I have a solution. We can all eat vegetables, live in mud huts, use our hands to hunt. Use nothing for clothing, because we can't use wood because wood is from trees, we can not have technology and cars. We don't need power you're right. We can live in the dark with candles...wait...that's oil....we can't do that either cause we can't drill due to you pathetic, lower standard of living imbeciles who do nothing to but bring every creature down with you.
Go back to Johnson land
JediMaster6788 1 year ago
Global warming is nothing. Global warming has been started by liberals and the media all for one thing. MONEY. They are swarming mass rallies, they are telling us to contribute money to stop this "threat" by humans. They are telling us lies and made up propaganda to get them to believe what they want to believe and if we don't, we MUST be stupid and MUST be swayed. That's why they are still out there. EVERYONE MUST believe it to them.
Global warming is not REAL! Ahh, the human mind...
JediMaster6788 1 year ago
@JediMaster6788
Perhaps you should limit yourself to topics about which you have some knowledge (perhaps Star Wars trivia?). Because you're just embarrassing yourself with your ignorant rants.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot Perhaps you should try to debate the issue with him, simply denying everything he said and calling it 'ignorant rants' isn't exactly a convincing argument.
MrLiderlig09 1 year ago
@MrLiderlig09
To what end? Anyone who would point to examples of record snowfall and suggest that they're somehow evidence against global warming clearly has no idea what the term "global warming" actual means.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@MrLiderlig09
It's like debating a creationist: Most of them have a limited understanding of science, and those that do are invariably guilty of cherry-picking data to buttress their religious preconceptions.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
I love how politicans and journalists debate global warming as if they know what the f*** they are talking about. People, do not listen to any of these morons when forming an opinion on the subject because not one of them including Al Gore have any idea whats going on. If you want to join the debate then get your information from a credible source. Cenk is not a credible source, he is an idiot.
thevisionist 1 year ago
"Propaganda!" Really? the 928+ scientific papers are all lies? The melting ice caps=myth?
"It snowed in the south!" Right.....Then it melted the next day. It's not like the south became a frozen tundra.
I love how so many of you clowns shout out"climate is always changing and sporadic" Yeah, no shit Sherlock, the POINT is that the gases and pollutants which WE pump into the atmosphere are speeding up the process, this major problem is not occurring NATURALLY.
Dumb da da da DUMMMMBBBB!!!
rinka777778 1 year ago
If I believe correctly...all those "smart" scientists said in the 70's, we weren't going to live long enough to see the 90's if we didn't start doing something about global cooling because we were all going to die. We weren't going to live long enough because the Earth was going to be all frozen. Well...some of the scientists are the same ones today saying...we need to do something about global warming or we won't live another couple of decades.
REAL graphs has shown it has gotten cooler.
JediMaster6788 1 year ago
@JediMaster6788
Humor me and NAME those scientists, NAME the papers and books they have written, NAME the studies they have conducted, NAME the interviews they have done, WHERE can I see them?. WHO IN THE HELL said we wouldn't live long enough to see the 90's? Throwing out made up "facts" don't work for me. Sorry
rinka777778 1 year ago
@rinka777778
Oh, and when you provide this list, which I can't wait to see, you have to include more than two scientists
rinka777778 1 year ago
Look in the history books. If you want to read. Look up online, back in the 1970's, 80's and 90's it was all about global cooling. You can ask an senior or your grandfather. Are you another Al Gore. I better put my sound on that only YOU can hear. BUZZZ can you hear it? hahaha
JediMaster6788 1 year ago
Comment removed
rinka777778 1 year ago
"Ha!Ha! Buzzzzz!" Ughhhh.....God, you are such a retard. Since it seems you are incredibly dumb, I'll repeat. NAME THEM. I love it when ignorant people dig up one quote such as "we'll be gone by the 90's" and then use it to prove that their argument is right. And, by the way, I don't give a rats ass what your opinion is. YOU are not a scientist, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about, and apparently disregard facts. Al Gore? Yes, asshole, I care about the environment
rinka777778 1 year ago
@JediMaster6788
Are you amusing yourself?
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
Global warming is pure propaganda! They see an incline in climate change over the years and they all freak out. The climate like the weather is always changing and sporadic. It always spikes up and goes down like the stock market. There is simply not enough evidence to conclude man-made global warming. I'm disappointed the way science and theory are thrown around. It's not science!
tfiore22 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Organized Crime in Charge of EU Carbon Trade, Europol Says"
— EUXTV
/watch?v=oL-e33oaI94
CRAPCANNONS 1 year ago
if you are so interested you go look for the proof, it is out there if you look, but you are too fucking lazy or stupid to try...fuck you sjs334
Igo2Pattaya 1 year ago
@Igo2Pattaya, real mature buddy. You're clearly the one who's being rational here... If you really had some shocking data that shows that global temps have not risen in 20 years then you would be parading all over the place instead of saying I should go look for it and insulting me for asking for something to back up your claim. I am "so interested" and I HAVE looked, and the data shows the opposite of what you are saying. Why are you so angry with me anyway?
sjs334 1 year ago
How about the FACT that the Earths temperature has not risen in at least 20 years? How did the last ice age end? The woolly mammoths eating to much chili and farting too much? Fact, the Earth cools and warms and there is NOTHING man does to cause it or to stop it.
Igo2Pattaya 1 year ago
@Igo2Pattaya do you have any proof that the Earth's temperature has not risen in at least 20 years? You claim this is a fact so you must have some sort of data to support this claim, right? So could you provide a link to a source or something?
sjs334 1 year ago
What if it is the orbit of the earth could we be getting closer to the sun?
dukee155 1 year ago
@dukee155 dumbass
DerrenBrown100 1 year ago
@DerrenBrown100 How am I a dumbass what if the Earths orbit was becoming less of an oval and more of a circle.
dukee155 1 year ago
@dukee155 Are you really that dumb?
DerrenBrown100 1 year ago
@DerrenBrown100 Okay than prove me wrong, you are just name calling.
dukee155 1 year ago
@dukee155 What do you mean, "prove me wrong'! Ask any cosmologist! FUCK!
DerrenBrown100 1 year ago
@DerrenBrown100 Well you can at least quote those cosmologists.
dukee155 1 year ago
@dukee155 WTF fuck off know cosmologist has said that the Earths orbit has changed! You find the cosmologists saying that you bell end!
DerrenBrown100 1 year ago
@DerrenBrown100 Well this is based on my own observations, but are we in agreement that the earths orbit is not a perfect circle, and can always change because of that?
dukee155 1 year ago
@dukee155 The Earths orbit is almost a perfect circle. This orbit doesn't change!
DerrenBrown100 1 year ago
@DerrenBrown100 Then how do you explain perihelion, and aphelion?
dukee155 1 year ago
@DerrenBrown100 Also it varies every year
dukee155 1 year ago
Sunspot activity plays a role in global temperatures. Higher sunspot activity leads to highter temperatures on every planet in the solar system. The CO2 claim is made by politicians who have mutual gains by passing cap and trade and carbon credits.
aspie101 1 year ago
@aspie101 THANK YOU, someone that understands what astronomers & meteorologists have been trying to tell us. The sun plays a MUCH bigger role in our climate than we do... you'd think that would be obvious. We're now seeing the sun become slightly hotter, but enough to effect us. As a star burns its supply of hydrogen it has to start burning helium created through fusion, which is a slightly "heavier" element. This causes the star to become hotter from the immense pressure of added mass.
Macabre215 1 year ago
@Macabre215 Nature has her different periods of temperature. Corrupt politicians such as Al Gore use every natural disaster as proof of global warming. If cap and trade passes, he and his cronies will use the tax money raised to purchase bigger houses, bigger private jets and bigger private yachts. It is important to take care of the environment, but corrupt politicians use environmentalist propaganda for mutual gain.
aspie101 1 year ago
hehe, this reminds me of the Movie "The Day After Tommorrow" where global warming caused an Ice Age
lasalle1alpha 1 year ago
GLOBAL WARMING IS BULLSHIT
Igo2Pattaya 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A barrel floating in the ocean will grow a seaweed farm. It would be easy to create rainforest sized algae farms mid ocean. The seaweed farms would photosynthesis, as well as the lifeforms themselves would be made of carbon.
Cheap. Proactive. Harmless.
Also mid ocean seaweed (algae) farms could be towed to counties in need for emergency food fuel.
No downside.
Build seaweed farms from shore and tow them out to sea and anchor them. Polluting companies could sponsor the low costs.
Win Win Win
RichLOAguy 1 year ago
As a 20 year heating and cooling tech, I can say that last summer was the coolest sumer in 80 years (a record cool summer = record low income, So I pay more attention to this than that fool) Now this winter we had a heavy winter. (one day it snowed in 49 states!) I'm in Chicago and we still are seeing freezing temps at night and the snow won't be gone till this weekend. I like how "one snow storm doesn't prove anything" yet katrina proved global climate change. This guys a douche...
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
windycityjohn400 are you saying last Summer had record low temps worldwide or just in your city of Chicago? Also the same link that could exist between warming and more severe storms like Katrina would explain more powerful snowstorms as well. It's not a contradiction. More heat over oceans puts more energy/moisture into the system and can lead to more extreme storms with a lot of precipitation. But 1 or 2 storms, like Katrina or 2010 winter storms, doesn't prove anything either way.
sjs334 1 year ago
The US had a RECORD COOL SUMMER. Coolest in 80 years.Yes, more heat over oceans= more evaporation. But rainfall cools the surface of the earth. It also takes COLD to make snow. So why don't they ever talk about that? It's a balance. They called it a hole in the ozone..till it got smaller..then it was global warming..till they discovered (the hidden truth) it had been cooling for 15 years..now they point to everyEruption/earthquake/hurricane/storm/and drought and claim it's global climate change.
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
windycityjohn, you keep saying it's been cooling for 15 years. Where are you pulling that statistic from? I've never heard that before. The hole in the ozone got smaller because people weren't fighting over whether it was taking place and actual changes were made to significantly reduce the amount of aerosol emissions that were causing the hole. US is still just one part of globe. When did anyone say it wouldnt be cold enough for snow by 2010 or that every region would be warmer at all times?
sjs334 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
sjs334, Professor Phil Jones himself stated that there's been no statistical warming for the last 15 years.
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
Professor Phil Jones himself stated that there's been no statistical warming for the last 15 years.
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
4TIMESAYEAR, do you even know what "not statistically significant" means? It just means that more data over more time is needed in order to make definitive conclusions based on that particular time period. It doesn't mean no warming, no detectable warming, or anything along those lines. As for your point about Iowa temps last year you are still only talking about 1 year and just the midwestern US. GLOBAL Climate is long term trends for the planet as a whole, not just where you or wcJohn live.
sjs334 1 year ago
sjs334-what you describe is manipulation of numbers. "Not statistically significant" according to the dictionary is as follows
not: In no way; to no degree. Used to express negation, denial, refusal, or prohibition
sta·tis·ti·cal(ly) Of, relating to, or employing statistics or the principles of statistics.
significant: important; of consequence.
In other words it's of no consequence statistically. Period.
As per Iowa's winters, it was NOT just one & NOT just the winters.
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
Climate is long term trends, but it not "for the planet as a whole" - the world does not have one single climate, but many: Climate is determined by the latitude, altitude, etc.
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
Why are my comments not posting?
Climate is long term trends, but it not "for the planet as a whole" - the world does not have one single climate, but many: Climate is determined by the latitude, altitude, etc.
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
Comments are buried far down because they are replies to old posts. Using your dictionary definitions, "not statistically significant" means in no way of consequence to the principles of statistics (i.e. representing an overall pattern or trend). That's not the same as not significant in a colloquial sense it just means THAT DATA ALONE is not enough to make a statistical conclusion (it's only 15 years). GLOBAL climate change looks at averages of many individual climates from the entire planet.
sjs334 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
sjs334-what you describe is manipulation of numbers. "Not statistically significant" according to the dictionary is as follows
not: In no way; to no degree. Used to express negation, denial, refusal, or prohibition
sta·tis·ti·cal(ly) Of, relating to, or employing statistics or the principles of statistics.
significant: important; of consequence.
In other words it's of no consequence statistically. Period.
As per Iowa's winters, it was NOT just one & NOT just the winters.
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
My apologies, windycityjohn400 - that was supposed to be for sjs334 -
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
Wow......."windycityjohn400" says "RECORD COOL SUMMER"......NASA says "second hottest year on record" and "2000s were the hottest decade on record" ........whom to believe?
tool.
festdir 1 year ago
Believe the guy who makes his living (or when it's cool doesn't) off the actual weather. NOT the government agency getting paid millions to push the liberal global warming agenda. How about this...stop listening to all the B.S. about temps in places you've never heard of and just look at your own thermostat! Ask a friend with a boat how much use it got last summer. Water was too cool for swimming most of the summer. Ask a plow driver if it was a good year. Record global snow cover!!!
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
Ah, a totally reasonable and NOT BATSHIT CRAZY response.....NASA is all a CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!
Here is a fun fact.....just b/c you 'never heard of a place' doesn't mean it doesn't exist. On Jan. 11, 2010 Melbourne, Australia had a temp of 114 F....if you had been there on that day, would global warming pass the prestigious 'windycityjohn the clueless Polack' test? I am sure NASA would be interested in that info!!!!!!!! tool.
festdir 1 year ago
So I supose your incapable of understanding that extremes cancel each other out. IT FUCKING SNOWED IN 49 OF 50 STATES! So if it's hot on the other side of the globe at the same time..it's a balance! Just like you saying snow in Chicago doesn't disprove global warming......heat in Australia doesn't = a global crisis. Brain washed nut jobs like you who believe statements based on false information are the TOOLS! Next year when it's NOT 114 in Melborne you'll say it's global climate change. DOUCHE
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
Hundreds of scientists, with access and educations from the most prestigious universities in the world, whom are experts in the field of climate, with tens of thousands of Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals.
Vs. 'windycityjohn400' with access to Thermostat instructions, educated at some shitty trade school, with dozens of 'youtube' comments.........MY GOD!!!!! CLASH OF THE TITANS!!!!!!!!
tool.
festdir 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hundreds of scientists, with access and educations from the most prestigious universities in the world, whom are experts in the field of climate, with tens of thousands of Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals. Vs. 'windycityjohn400' with access to Thermostat instructions, educated at some shitty trade school, with dozens of 'youtube' comments.........MY GOD!!!!! CLASH OF THE TITANS!!!!!!!!
tool.
festdir 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hundreds of scientists, with access and educations from the most prestigious universities in the world, whom are experts in the field of climate, with tens of thousands of Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals.
Vs. 'windycityjohn400' with access to Thermostat instructions, educated at some shitty trade school, with dozens of 'youtube' comments.........MY GOD!!!!! CLASH OF THE TITANS!!!!!!!!
tool.
festdir 1 year ago
@windycityjohn400 what an ignorant comment. Just focus on temperatures from last summer in the central U.S. and ignore the rest of the world as well as decades of other data? Apparently you don't understand the concept of GLOBAL CLIMATE change. You also don't seem to understand the importance of comprehensive data collection and analysis. To rehash an earlier dialogue we had, your personal thermostat observations are not statistically significant ; )
sjs334 1 year ago
And your constant use of data that was proven to be false and manipulated by the members of the Global warming movment (as displayed in their private memos that went public and turned this debate on it's ear) proves to be comical. Who's "Science" isn't tied to large global climate change research contracts? If they say it's cooling, the funding stops! Most of the crap your spewing is theory based on man programed models that only used the top 60% warmest numbers. Clueless, Brainwashed,liberal
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
Windycityjohn400. First off, not once did I say that global climate change is clearly taking place and is man made. Although I think the evidence shows that it is a real concern, my comments have been towards your flawed logic, not your overall position. Weather you trust the people keeping the data or not, to outright say that the very concept of tracking worldwide trends when studying global phenomena is not necessary is just a stupid thing to say.
sjs334 1 year ago
I didn't say that. I said I don't believe the results they are reporting. I don't believe global warming is man made, so the models of gloom and doom are based on their over blown paranoia. "If" you believe the globe is warmer, look to nearby planets that have polar melting occurring on them. That's not from our cars buddy! I'd blame a warmer cycle of solar. Those cycles are natual and will cycle cool again without the carbon taxing and man made hysteria.
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
You did say people should check their own thermostat and not worry about the data from "places they've never heard of". BTW Climategate quotes have been misconstrued and taken out of context as theyre gleaned from emails over 10 yrs and many topics. HIDE THE DECLINE refers to a well known abnormality in tree ring data. A TRICK just means a convenient way to do something, as in the phrase "that should do the trick" which I'm sure you've heard before. It's not something deceptive. I could go on...
sjs334 1 year ago
You could TRY to go on....but phrasing a sentance that way is just a trick to make it seam like your point was well made and there are plenty more points you could site to further cement your statement as fact. Truth is, you can't pick and choose. When the Climategate quotes were released, they were COMPLETE MEMOS! You of course are only familiar with the Liberal Cliff notes versions. Tell me...are you hotter today that 10 years ago on this date where you are? Is the ocean in your basement yet?
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
Uh no. It wasn't to get away from actually having to say more, I ran out of characters douche. I'll give more examples if you want. I know the email/memos were complete but a couple phrases were carefully selected and taken out of context like "hide the decline" and "Mike's nature trick". Did anyone say Philadelphia would be under water by 2010? I don't recall that being the case. By the way I do feel like temperatures throughout the year have been warmer lately than I remember 10 years ago.
sjs334 1 year ago
SEE! I stumped you already. Those 2 little sentances are the only ones from the liberal playbook you bothered to remember. If your in Philly and didn't think this past winter was a whopper...than your not only drinking the global warming cool-aid, you must be drinking it straight from Al Gore's cock! My brother In-law runs a 1/4 Maine's plow truck fleet. The east coast got snow this winter you you've got dumb ideas! You and AL, Go watch "Inconveniant Truth" and jerk off. Liberal dumbass. LMFAO.
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
Wow you are more immature than I thought. How did you stump me? WTF are you talking about? I was defending 2 particular allegations made by people like you, dumbass. If you want to talk about another example from the emails then just say which one and I'll discuss it. But you won't because you are a dimwitted coward. Yea we got a lot of snow in Philly. It didn't snow every day, it was a few MONSTER STORMS. We just had another one last weekend but guess what, it was a shit ton of rain.
sjs334 1 year ago
ummmm.......... it's March? You were expecting something else? I guess 4timesayear's comments are just as screwy as mine, right? Go to bed, you sould have work in the morning. Or is mom letting you stay up late tonight?
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
Yes, windycityjohn it's March, so temps are generally warm enough for precipitation to fall as rain. Just like in January and February it was cold enough for snow. Were you expecting something else then? It only has to be below about 33-34F (<32 in the clouds) on the surface for snow to fall. The same thing (moisture) that causes a lot of snow in winter causes a lot of rain in spring and summer. Understand? Comments r burried far down because they are replies to an older original comment.
sjs334 1 year ago
Ok...so it rained. Big deal. Was it too much?Too little?Too much,Too soon? You had snow in the winter. I guess it was all just what you expected. Still not sure if you think you got more or less than you planed on. I don't know you or your age or level of education. Me, I'm 40. 20 years making a living off the weather. HVAC TECH. Extended family history....Almost all farmers going back to the Mayflower. (yes my tree traces that far) My experience says. No Global threat. Don't worry, be happy.
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
You are missing my point about the last big storm being rain. The point is that the unusual amount of snow this winter was not caused by an equally unusual amount of cold, it was caused by a few large moisture systems that coincided with temps below 32F in the 2 coldest avg months of the year (Jan/Feb). BTW I'm a 26 year old Law student who majored in meteorology briefly at Penn State. I don't doubt your expertise in Chicago local temps but Global Climate is much broader than that.
sjs334 1 year ago
For the last time...I'm not talking about just Chicago! What part of It's NEVER been cold enough for us to have it snow in 49 of the 50 states at the same time don't you get? We set 1047 weather related records country wide this winter! You hear about large chunks of ice falling into the sea, and the media sucks you into thinking it's from melting. The chunk that fell off that was as big as Manhattan was PUSHED into the sea by the massive force of all the NEW ice up hill from it. It's Glacial!
windycityjohn400 1 year ago
WCJohn that point was referring more to the recored amounts of snow this year not the extent of snow cover. There was an unusually high amount of large moisture-rich systems this winter that coincided with a cold wave which is why snow covered such a large swath of the country. Since the snow fell in such large quantities it stuck around longer and the amount of states with snow on the ground kept tallying up. P.S. I'm not an alarmist and I don't rely on mainstream media for my information.
sjs334 1 year ago
@windycityjohn400
If it snowed more than normal that means on average, the globe is actually warmer to make the water evaporate and turn into clouds.
personof11777 1 year ago
It's not just Chicago, but Iowa as well-and not just the summers, but the winters. A year ago we had a winter rated #32 out of 136yrs of record-keeping. I couldn't shut my furnace off until the middle of June; I believe the year before that it was one week into June. This winter is beating that one. They are also starting sooner; we had our first snowfall Oct 10 with temps in the 20's.
So you see, we're not just talking about a single snow storm, but a long term pattern that's emerging.
4TIMESAYEAR 1 year ago
@windycityjohn400 He's a hack for the democrats, just like how Bill O'Rielly is the hack for the republicans.
aspie101 1 year ago
@windycityjohn400
Do you pay close attention to the weather all over the world? Its called global warming because its a rise in average temperature over the entire world; not the USA in particular.
Aerosteon 1 year ago
Actually data shows that the weather has been cooling down for the past 15 years... By the way since when does that dude have a doctorate in environmental sciences?
Emanouche 1 year ago
Emanouche, I'd like to see that data. According to a recent interview with Phil Jones he discussed that there has been a .12C/decade warming trend in the last 15 years but it fell just short of statistical significance for that time period, i.e. more data is needed outside what was recorded in those 15 years in order to make any conclusions.
sjs334 1 year ago
So many so called scientists blowing the global warming horn are proven to not even be scientists. Much of the reports for global warming are not even peer reviewed. Fact that it snowed instead of rain in areas that normaly do not get snow means it is warmer? Might want to look into all the fraud with data before you claim this is the warmest decade ever, they have caught "scientists" only using the warmest 60% of total temps. If you use the warmest temps you must also use the coldest!
tubaboy71 2 years ago
DEC 2009= 2nd greatest global snow cover on record.
Believers seem split between calling this 'anecdotal trivial weather' and even more hilariously 'evidence of global warming'!
GuybrushThreebwood 2 years ago
TheCastellan - Currently, we do not have an alternative to fossil fuel. Renewable technology is costly, unreliable and the end product, pricey. Fossil fuel has a proven history. Its lifted us out of poverty and given us the lifestyle we all enjoy today. Its a case of fantasy versus reality.
AGWnot 2 years ago
Here's my take. Climate changes we see happening are part of an earth change cycle. Now have we as humans added to it? Yes, but to a small extent. We're just making go slightly faster.
Am I saying SUV's and stuff gonna wreck us....no....but that's no excuse to stick to fossil fuels..go to big cities out west and your nose and eyes will tell you. We need to soon tell the oil companies what they can go do to themselves.
TheCastellan 2 years ago
Watch what wind farms are doing to protected bird species. Beautiful vulture being struck down and killed. Also read the posts on that page.
watch?v=9srPoOU6_Z4&feature=player_embedded
AGWnot 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is what the environ-mental-cases don't want us to know about wind farms and the great numbers of protected birds that are being killed. Read the messages posted on that link below.
Watch this beautiful vulture get struck down on Youtube.
watch?v=9srPoOU6_Z4&feature=pl ayer_embedded
AGWnot 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
posted 6 days ago by "disgustedAmerican1"
I used to work security at a wind farm. People have no idea how many birds are killed by these things.
watch?v=9srPoOU6_Z4&feature=player_embedded
AGWnot 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A vulture being struck and killed by a wind turbine.
eureferendum(.)blogspot(.)com/2010/03/bird-choppers(.)ht ml
AGWnot 2 years ago
Republicans are just about as smart as you (Democrat?) Both not that bright. Prosaic. I wish to err on the side of caution re spaceship Earth. The "proof" of global warming is weak. The biggest problem is the incredibly short period time that weather data has been gathered. eg What caused the mini ice age in the 13th century in England? Greenland was called Greenland because it was actually green at the time - Was that global warming due to cows and horses??
WECantThink 2 years ago
*inoculation*
AGWnot 2 years ago
Instead, the Corus plant in India will now be purchasing carbon credits to offset their CO2 output. The money to purchase such carbon credits offsets will be paid into a World bank which might have good intentions initially by passing on the proceeds to poorer nations but nonetheless, there is a strong possibility that some unscrupulous politicians will skim excess profits, as is usually the case. More regulation and red-tape leaves room for fraudulent activity and gains.
AGWnot 2 years ago
True, however no regulation at all leaves room for even more fraudulent/harmful activity. I agree that the far reaching impacts of legislation aimed at slowing GW must be discussed and a smart plan should be put in place that does more good than harm. However, that discussion doesn't won't take place as long as one side of the political spectrum spends all its efforts on denying that there is a problem in the first place rather than submitting alternative ideas.
sjs334 2 years ago
sjs334 - Exactly. The reason there are Antitrust Laws in place. These laws are designed to prevent unfair competition in any form including mergers which might create monopolies which are to the detriment of the consume. Just ask Bill Gates and Microsoft what he thinks about these laws :) Politicians in the West have been pushing to pass new regulations on AGW for quite a while now.
AGWnot 2 years ago
@AGWnot
now if we can slap that against the fossil furl companies. I mean why do people who come up with a way to get away from fossil fuels tend to meet a nasty end?
and anyone saying big oil and coal are honest and innocent will have me pulling an abdominal muscle from intence laughter.
TheCastellan 2 years ago
sjs334 - Only when the CRU emails emerged did politicians decide to take another look at the evidence. Had it not been for these emails, the new carbon laws would have passed without a hitch. MSM kept mum on the subject and pushed AGW all the way. Which, if I may add, is totally unjust and unfair.
AGWnot 2 years ago
*consumer*
AGWnot 2 years ago
Though, since then a lot has changed and this is why big business is now supporting the AGW cause. They stand to gain handsomely from the sale of carbon credits as was the case with the Corus Steel plant in the UK which sold out to Tata Steel in India and will therefore be belching out more CO2 than previously, besides real pollutants, since it won't have to adhere to strict EU emission laws.
AGWnot 2 years ago
Had it been otherwise, we would have more than welcomed a breakaway from fossil fuel exporting nations and the necessary private investment would have flowed in uninterrupted and without the need for government intervention.
AGWnot 2 years ago
But the worse thing about a tax on CO2 is that it will impoverish people further as a result of rising prices on virtually every manufacture good imaginable. Renewables technology hasn't yet arrived to the point of the reliability we expect, excessive equipment cost and ultimately more expensive electricity.
AGWnot 2 years ago
sjs334 - Absolutely, I'd suspect oil companies of lobbying their way through anything to get their way. Just like the drug companies did with avian and swine flu. They raked in billions in profits for a flu which never came. Now governements, even here in Malta, are stuck with large stocks which nobody is willing to take as a result of some deaths from the innoculation itself.
AGWnot 2 years ago
I could actually listen to what this clown had to say if over the last ~5 years every AGW hoax denier on every newscast hadn't refered to every hot day and every other weather event as proof of AGW.
The only reason the AGW hoax got any traction at all is because of a few successive mild winters so live by the sword die by the sword.
azul93gt 2 years ago
I live in Malta, an island where the population density is listed 7th on the world stage. Two fifths of the island is uninhabited and used primarily for agriculture and leisure. Had you to apply the same population density as Malta's to the world population of 6.7 billion, you'd fit them comfortably in Australia.
AGWnot 2 years ago
It is the economy which dictates population size. This will also halt the migration of millions of poor Africans seeking a better life abroad. Unknown to many, Africans would rather live with their own kind than in a society composed of mainly white people and strange customs. And if you think overpopulation isn't a big lie, think again.
AGWnot 2 years ago
From a world population in1900 of 1.6 billion people with an average life expectancy of 35 to a global population of 6.7 billion and a doubling in life expectancy. That is an 8 fold increase in human life years. Oil and coal are miracles of nature and should now be used, in greater volumes than ever before, to lift the rest of the developing world out of poverty. To raise their standard of living and education to a point where they'll have smaller families, as is the case with Europe.
AGWnot 2 years ago
Furthermore, the oil and coal companies never suggested to government to increase taxes until now. Now you're all in bed together. What's for certain is that oil and coal companies, for a reasonable profit, gave us an unlimited resource by which in just 100 years, lifted the people of the western world out of poverty.
AGWnot 2 years ago
@AGWnot, Of course fossil fuels have been very beneficial to industrialized nations and we should be grateful for that. However, can you really deny that if anybody has a monetary interest in making sure people doubt GW its them? Not only do they not want to limit thier own emmissions/waste but would want people not to 'go green' because it means less demand for their product. Also, it is believed that the North Arctic ocean contains a large oil reserve only accessible bc of melting ice caps.
sjs334 2 years ago
You'd have got the same kind of backlash the AGW camp is experiencing today. In the case of AGW, the scientists have colluded with politicians to manipulation of data for reasons which were unknown. Until now I do not know of anyone who's apologised to the 1.5 billion people living in the Himalayan areas. This is truly criminal. Its this very arrogance which proves to me without any doubt that the 'scientists' pushing AGW are wrong. True science is never settled but refined with time.
AGWnot 2 years ago
Something important is happening
Take a look at William Tarkovsky's youtube eco-video The Book of New Creation.
Share with like-minded concerned and green!
ClimateAware 2 years ago
ClimateAware -You can rest assured something is happening. All you need do is count the numbers.
AGWnot 2 years ago
off to bed - good night
AGWnot 2 years ago
Good night. If the interviewer asked Jones why he used Mike's trick instead of a different "convenient way of doing something" then he would need to discuss it but the question was about whether 'trick' means a deceptive ploy like it does in everyday use. The fact that you fail to see the logic in what I am saying is astounding but ok.
sjs334 2 years ago
sjs334 - Absence of logic is demonstrated in the fact that people like yourself still believe in AGW even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I hope you do understand that the question and answer session between the BBC and Phil Jones was rehearsed.
The fact that the 'trick' belongs to the discredited and deceitful Michael Mann is highly relevant.
AGWnot 2 years ago
AGWnot, I don't have some sort of dogmatic belief that AGW is a real problem nor do I have any interest in it being so. My assessment is that as of now, the evidence is in favor of it being a legitimate concern. And I feel as though the coal and oil industries have put a lot of time, money, and effort into misrepresenting the state of the science. I'm not sure what "overwhelming evidence" you speak of but I'd like to hear it. I'd also like to know what proof you have that the Q&A was not legit.
sjs334 2 years ago
sjs334 - Law states that someone is innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, its all hearsay with respect to the fossil fuel companies misrepresenting science. Had it been the case I'd have been on the forefront of the fight against them.
AGWnot 2 years ago
sjs334 - The trick is Michael Mann's trick so not just any trick. The same trickster who created the "hockey stick" graph.
AGWnot 2 years ago
They write: the benefits of scientific data being made available and thus open to scrutiny outweigh the perceived risks. To this end, scientific information should be made available on request as outlined in the Freedom of Information Act.
AGWnot 2 years ago
Royal Society of Chemistry backs sharing of data in contrast to Jones standard practice statement
1 03 2010
While Dr. Phil Jones prattles on about withholding code and data being standard practice The Royal Society of Chemistry has made a statement to the Parliamentary inquiry saying they as an organization support open data sharing. They now join the Institute of Physics in making a strong statement on the practices of UEA/CRU.
AGWnot 2 years ago
Actually, the effect has occurred in the Great Lakes area. They haven't noticed there because that's the pick up point. The dumping point was here on the Eastern Seaboard.
Maxdwolf 2 years ago
sjs334 - In Phil Jones answer to question Q it is strange how he doesn't even mention Michael Mann since it was his (Mike's) nature trick.
AGWnot 2 years ago
Why is that interesting? If "trick" is a commonly used term in statistical analysis then he doesn't need to specifically mention Michael Mann while explaining the accepted definition of trick in this context. Right?
sjs334 2 years ago
sjs334 - I beg to differ. Phil Jones is specific in his request to use Mike's nature trick.
AGWnot 2 years ago
sjs334 - Therefore, there is nothing common about the trick.
AGWnot 2 years ago
AGWnot - The question was "In the e-mails you refer to a "trick" which your critics say SUGGESTS you conspired to TRICK THE PUBLIC?..."
He was answering the question asked by clarifying that 'trick' in that sense is not something deceptive but rather "a convenient way of achieving something". Can't you see that there is no need to mention which particular "convenient method" he used? It's irrelevant to the question that was asked, as is the frequency at which Mike's specific trick is used.
sjs334 2 years ago
sjs334 - Strange how he doesn't even mention Michael Mann and his (Mike's) nature trick in his answer.
AGWnot 2 years ago