On Friday, November 21, 2014 12:23:16 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 5:52:36 AM UTC-7, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 12:31:20 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Monday, November 17, 2014 7:37:59 PM UTC-7, wrote:

The forecast for tonight, here in the Midwest, is for the low to be in
the single digits and the wind chill to be in the negative single
digits.

It's called _global_ warming because the average temperature of the
whole world gets hotter, but just because the average goes up
doesn't mean there can't be record cold in some parts of the world,
and climate scientists know that having more thermal energy does
stuff like make the jet stream in the northern hemisphere move
farther south than normal and bring more cold with it.

I'd like to see the evidence that shows most scientists "know" that
global warming is moving the jet stream to the south. As opposed to
some scientists postulating that it "might" be a factor. There is a
big difference, you know.

Imagine the dust bowl of the 30s occuring today. Immediately a whole
lot of people would jump on the bandwagon that "man-made global warming"
caused it. Today, all that has to happen is for the jet stream to move
and instantly it has to be global warming. Sorry, not buying it.

No, you can't say the weather where you live being cold
proves there's no global warming, just as I couldn't cite
the unusually warm weather we had a few weeks ago as proof
of global warming.

Apparently fairly mainstream climate science says global
warming is affecting the jet stream.

I thought the Dust Bowl was caused by overfarming without
the use of good soil conservation practices.

Did overfarming cause the drought? Without a drought, there would have
been no dustbowl. Good grief. I'm still
waiting for that "fairly mainstream climate science" reference
that says global warming is making the jet stream move farther
south than normal.

The most interesting part of this whole global warming thing is
watching the proponents grasp at straws now. The problem is that for
about the last 15 years, there has been almost no global warming,
the temp has been going basically sideways. So they are reduced to
nutty statements like that this Oct was the hottest on record. Yeah,
it was the hottest by .02 degrees, beating out 2003. That would seem
to me to be well within the margin of measurement error. And I also
would not be at all suprised to find fudging with the data. Did they
use the exact same data, from the exact same locations that they did
10, 20, 50 years ago? Unlikely. Almost certainly they've added readings
from new locations and then done some "adjustment" to factor those in.
And then they pull out a .02 degree difference. And the headline is
"Warmest Oct on Record", with most articles not even mentioning that
it's only .02 more than 11 years ago.

Me, I'm waiting to see which way the temp goes when it finally
breaks out of the 15 years sideways pattern.