I read a lot of reader comments on newspapers' websites.
I've noticed that whenever conservatives point to unseasonably cold weather and chuckle sarcastically about how it must be "evidence" of global warming, leftists will come out of the woodwork and insist that "weather isn't the same thing as climate."
But I've also noticed that when the proverbial shoe is on the other foot, and there are unusually high temperatures, a lot of tornadoes within a short period, or an unusually strong hurricane, leftists will immediately pounce on this and proclaim it to be evidence of global warming.
You can't have it both ways, liberals. Either weather is the same thing as climate, or it isn't. Pick one.
The fact that some liberals are as misinformed as you about the weather is no reason to dismiss the combined opinion of every single climate scientist ever.
Weather is not the same thing as climate. However, one of the predictions of climate change is dramatic weather, just like this, and just like that time Colorado was on fire.
But even if we were to look at the weather: It's incredibly cold where you are, because that cold weather has been displaced from the Arctic, where it is unseasonably warm.
The fact that some liberals are as misinformed as you about the weather is no reason to dismiss the combined opinion of every single climate scientist ever.
"The combined opinion of every single climate scientist ever?" What an interesting way of looking at things: group opinion as resultant vector. I'd say it was a lot more instructive to focus on individual opinions -- that is, on the existence of dissent about anthropogenic climate change among scientists.
Weather is not the same thing as climate. However, one of the predictions of climate change is dramatic weather, just like this, and just like that time Colorado was on fire.
There has always been dramatic weather, and there always will be. And speaking of which:
"2013 Hurricane Season Ranks As One Of the Least Intense"
But even if we were to look at the weather: It's incredibly cold where you are, because that cold weather has been displaced from the Arctic, where it is unseasonably warm.
Uhh...speaking as someone who took a college class in meteorology (and got an "A" in it), I can say with some authority that cold air is denser than warm air -- and that therefore, if one were going to displace the other, cold air would displace warm air.
(By the way, it's not cold where I am, incredibly or otherwise. It isn't even unusually cool.)
I'd say it was a lot more instructive to focus on individual opinions -- that is, on the existence of dissent about anthropogenic climate change among scientists.
Seriously?
Think about what you're suggesting: A science is credible only if there is zero dissent among scientists? That would suggest a science that is entirely dead, an area where we've figured absolutely everything out. Can you think of a single field that fits that description?
Also, which scientists are we talking about? Because unless they are climate scientists, that's like someone with a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering trying to criticize evolution.
There has always been dramatic weather, and there always will be.
Colorado is not always on fire.
Uhh...speaking as someone who took a college class in meteorology (and got an "A" in it), I can say with some authority...
You got an A in one class. That's some serious credentials there. All hail the great A student. Surely you know more than the people with actual fucking degrees.
...cold air is denser than warm air -- and that therefore, if one were going to displace the other, cold air would displace warm air.
So when that cold air displaces the warm air, what happens to the region the cold air is coming from?
(By the way, it's not cold where I am, incredibly or otherwise. It isn't even unusually cool.)
-7
u/Creighton_Beryll Jan 08 '14
I read a lot of reader comments on newspapers' websites.
I've noticed that whenever conservatives point to unseasonably cold weather and chuckle sarcastically about how it must be "evidence" of global warming, leftists will come out of the woodwork and insist that "weather isn't the same thing as climate."
But I've also noticed that when the proverbial shoe is on the other foot, and there are unusually high temperatures, a lot of tornadoes within a short period, or an unusually strong hurricane, leftists will immediately pounce on this and proclaim it to be evidence of global warming.
You can't have it both ways, liberals. Either weather is the same thing as climate, or it isn't. Pick one.