Global Warming Is a Cause of This Year’s Extreme Weather

What a load of non-scientific garbage. The earth has had tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, Carboniferous period (CO2 was over 4000 ppm), floods, droughts, asteroid, comet and meteor collisions---as PROVEN by billions of years in the geologic record. Yet somehow in this Begley bimbo's small mind, it seems to be getting hotter, and we are causing it. How can 38 molecules of CO2 within 100,000 molecules of atmosphere cause global warming ? Answer---it cannot.
T.H. ALMOND
GEOLOGIST

I think all the double and triple posts on the Newsweak comment sections are caused by global warming.

It is obvious. How many people are living on Earth now. How many people are comsuming gas and other kinds of resources which directly or indirectly pollute the Earth? How do you feel and what do you smell when you cook with all windows closed?

Oh please! When one of the founders of the global warming hoax came out and said it was all a joke, that should have tipped everyone off as to how truly exaggerated this problem is. The founder of the weather channel, one of the leading pushers of this global warming hoax admitted back at the end of 2007 that figures have been drastically exaggerated to serve the purposes of greedy environmentalist agencies. If global warming is such a problem, then why are we having some of the coldest winters in history? Don't tell me that's global warming too.

I agree that we need to do our part to conserve our natural resources and reduce pollution; but to blame every random weather event on a problem that was exaggerated to serve the purposes of greedy corporations and those that invest in them <cough - Al Gore - cough> is ignorance. Disasters like this have been happening throughout Earth's 5 billion year history, many times more severely than now, did the dinosaurs farting cause global warming that caused their extinction? Was the ice age ushered in by that global warming? NO! It's the natural course of weather on this planet, it goes through cycles. If the eruption of a volcano (which emits millions of times more greenhouse gases than we produce in a year) doesn't have the power to permanently, globally change our weather, how does a relatively little bit of carbon dioxide?

Anyone who believes that global warming is a fact isn't paying attention to reality and is blindly believeing a lie fed to them by a media funded by special interests and thriving on panic. I'm not even asking you to believe what I tell you; educate yourself on these issues. Global warming has been on the "junk science" list since its inception and continues to be on that list to this day. Just because I don't believe global warming is real (at least not in the capacity the media makes it seem), doesn't mean I'm stupid and naive. It means I don't believe what's spoon-fed to me. Naivity is tantamount to ignorance. Ignorance is not having the facts, so get your facts straight before believing special interests-funded propoganda like this article.

The Global Warming fanatics remind me of little kids who believe in Santa Claus. Their reality is obscured by all the presents under the tree.

Experts who study the weather don't believe in Global Warming. The drums are being pounded by liberal journalists and a handful of scientists and politicians who have built their careers and fortunes on the theory.

Climatologists can fall over themselves and blame global warming for a whole host of ills or bad weather but the fact remains that we had this before. A volcano eruption can cause more problems than all of human pollution. The whole thing boils down to, when we have a 70 mph wind gust, its caused by global warming, when it rains, its caused by global warming. Nothing is caused by nature nor can it be just the weather. Climatologists cannot predict the weather a week in advance with any accuracy how can they predict global warming? I believe it is man made with all the damning up of creeks and rivers to form lakes so development companies can charge a arm and a leg for lakefront property. Besides, how could the media sell magazines and papers if we did not have global warming. Its the hottest issue around.

Seeing people pointing to water vapor vs CO2 renews my faith in people's capability for intelligent and independent thought. Yes, we are spewing out carbon into the atmosphere, but it doesn't necessarily lead to the apocalypse because (Now, for that sect of global warming proponents that have made up their mind that the sky is falling and will not let things such as science or facts dissuade them, this is where you stick your fingers in your ears and say "Nyah, nyah, nyah! I can't hear you!") carbon dioxide has a paltry effect upon the global climate compared to other such evils as water and sunlight. The enthalpy of carbon dioxide (and if you don't know what enthalpy is, you really should look it up before debating climate change) is a fraction of that of water vapor. This is compounded by the fact that carbon dioxide is a much smaller part of the atmosphere than water vapor.

I'm not saying that we should just burn fossil fuels with reckless abandon because while I consider global warming dubious at best, I am sure that messing with the composition of the atmosphere is probably not the best idea and there are many other widely accepted reasons to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels such as air pollution, price volatility and a finite supply. I personally think America should increase renewables and alternatives until we only use coal/oil/natural gas that comes from America or is imported from Canada and maybe Mexico. There are plenty of reasons to reduce (yes, reduce not eliminate) our fossil fuel consumption, but we do not need pseudo-science and scare tactics from the Global Warming boogeyman. Acting on these false assumptions is just stupid when there are plenty of other good reasons.

If the question is: Are these events influenced by Man? Then, then answer is true. However, there are a number of different influences that could be playing a much bigger role than "global warming." First, look at the growth of suburbs and subsequent levees to protect them. Every roof, driveway, road, and parking lot reduces the ability of the land to aborb rain. Second, reduction of lowland/wetlands, installation of drainage projects under farmlands to drain excess water away, straightening of creeks and streams, etc, all significantly impact the ability of the land to absorb, hold, and/or slowly release rain and flood waters. Third, when upstream communities channel floodwaters into the tributaries via levees, the downstream cities and towns will flood on a regular basis, looking like a 100 year event, even if really isn't. Remember, the downstream communities receive all the upstream runoff plus the runoff from their own areas. Eventually, all cities and towns along the Mississippi and her tributary system will need to build 60ft dams at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars to build, let alone maintain. Or, we can be smarter about land use, wetland preservation, establishing floodplains, and save lives, money, and angst about global warming.

So, if you want to look for a culprit, I suggest you look at the very communities that are flooding instead of the global warming bogeyman. Invariably, we do it to ourselves, like building homes on breakwater islands and then blaming global warming for the hurricanes that demolish them. We cannot manage, and do not have anywhere near the resources, to micro-manage Nature. Plan ahead for floods. If you live in a floodplain, put your house on stilts. If you farm lowland, understand that every few years the river will wipe out your crops (and refertilize the soil), take the insurance and plant again next year. Above all quit jumping on the global warming bandwagon for every calamity as it won't solve anything and prevents clear thinking, rational decisions to mitigate these kinds of problems.

Still waiting for someone to explain my direct personal observation proving the climate was warmer at the time of discovery of the New World. Also last winter was coldest on record for China. Also snow cap extended farther south than before on satelite observation. You don't suppose our politicians would hood wink us do you?
Burt48

I agree with everything said in this article save for the words "a point of pride." It is more than a point of pride, it is supreme arogance for an ill-informed local weather reporter to reject the findings of their own professional society, the World Meterological Society and to ignore or deny the IPPC IV Report.

Accuweather, a favorite of the far right is the worst of the bunch of incompetent announcers.

Americans deserve the truth about climate change. Truth does not make it any easier to cope with wild weather but gives us a path to face our own energy mistakes before it's too late.

I agree with everything said in this article save for the words "a point of pride." It is more than a point of pride, it is supreme arogance for an ill-informed local weather reporter to reject the findings of their own professional society, the World Meterological Society and to ignore or deny the IPPC IV Report.

Accuweather, a favorite of the far right is the worst of the bunch of incompetent announcers. Americans deserve the truth about climate change. Truth does not make it any easier to cope with wild weather but gives us a path to face our own energy mistakes before it's too late.

Rapid Human pollution has caused carbon dioxide to enter the atmosphere and allow Sun radiation to enter. Carbon dioxide from burning of fossils goes to the atmosphere in affect causing a gas blanket around the earth. And therefore warming.

Most accounts of global warming indcate that worldwide tempertures have risen .4 c over the last 150 years, and that is moving out of the Little Ice Age. To take the statement "Rising temperatures boost the probability of extreme weather" and exterpolate that to "if once we experienced one Noachian downpour every 20 years, and now we suffer five, four are likely man-made." is simply irresponsible. This is no link between a given temperture rise and the probability (here quoted as 80%) that the cause is man made.

Everyone should be responsible, recycle, minimize their carbon foot print, and turn off electronics when not used. We should not however, succome to international pressure to jump on the carbon trading and Cap and Trade programs which many advocate. If America goes this route, we will surrender our national sovereignty to a U.N. equivalent who DO NOT have our national interest at heart. There will be the largest transfer of wealth in human history as industrialized nations transfer wealth to third world nations for their maintining "carbon banks" (if one believe they will truely do that).

Americans need to reduce pollution certainly, but our politicans need to create an energy policy to ween us off of hydrocarbons NOT TODAY but gradually over the next 10 to 20 years. A more rapid alternative will hit our economy like a sledge hammer and make $4.00 gas look like nirvana.

Ok lets try this one. Pollution by humans is done in a short period of time not in a few hundred years or in million of years but in a few years.