Posts archived in Climate Change


AMGer proves it snowed somewhere!

This just in: AMGer Vic Berardelli has internet evidence of snow fall in the Dakotas.

Sioux Falls, S.D. set a record for Nov. 5 with 5.7 inches of snow last Tuesday.

Even more telling is this notice from the National Weather Service:

this will mark a new record for the fewest number of days between the last 4+” snowfall in the Spring and the first 4+” snowfall in the Fall. This year will only be 197 days, which would break the old record of 203 days set in 1970, and would be a full 100 days shorter than the average of 297 days for the period of record since 1893.

Al Gore has not been heard from.

This fortunate bit of anecdotal evidence will allow Vic to ignore the scientific truth of global climate change for at least another 6 weeks, at which time he will hopefully realize that it is cold in Maine in December. At that point all reason to question thousands of scientists working hundreds of thousands of man-hours, trekking across the globe, and launching multi-billion dollar satellites to collect billions of data points will continue to be irrelevant to Vic because, yes, it will always snow somewhere around the world on any given day.

In other news, Vic had a solid shit today so we can all assume he will never have diarrhea.

You know most of the conservatives on AMG will deny climate change.

It isn’t unexpected when, as in this thread, AMGers take their jabs at the science when they look out their window and see snow, the difference between “climate” and “weather” notwithstanding.

But even I was a little surprised at the level of rationalization used by AMGer “IAC” to avoid confronting a new piece of hard evidence. You see, Republicans were funding a study to review the data on climate change. They hired a physicist who was a known skeptic. They called him into Congress to testify on his preliminary results.

This physicist made the corrections he thought necessary to “correct” the data that all the dirty hippies were using to make their well-known charts showing temperature going up. He said other scientists were picking data points that led to skewed results. So he went into the pool of data and picked his own sample.

But tragedy struck! His chart looked a lot a whole lot like the one other climate scientists have been showing for years. See below, where the conservative-funded study is the black line.

Whoops. Although I must be fair to the author of this new study: he showed a lot of guts coming into a Republican-led Congressional panel and telling them, essentially, that he might be changing his mind. He’s giving up a lot of future funding opportunities. Let’s respect his honesty.

So IAC’s liberal wife shows him an article in the Lewiston Sun Journal describing this train wreck of attempted Republican science rigging, and what is the guy’s response? Here it is:

I answered as follows: If this momentous announcement is true, would it not warrant better treatment, especially from a left-leaning paper, than a small tag on the front page leading to a small, detail-free piece buried inside near the want ads?

To paraphrase: it can’t be true because if it were true they would put it on the front page. It is big story! A huge story!

Except, it isn’t. That’s the point. That’s what we have been trying to tell you. In a world with Libya, Wisconsin, Japan, the Red Sox losing every game, and Governor LeNuts all vying for front page real estate, it just isn’t that exciting to lead with “New scientific study agrees with most other scientific studies!

It would only seem like big news to you, IAC, because you’ve bought into this notion that scientists have nothing better to do with their time than try to piss you off. And that the experts aren’t nearly unanimous in their agreement that climate change is real, which, to repeat, they are.

The details of the Republican climate study gone wrong can be found here.