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

Man has always blamed himself for changes in the climate and weather in order to feel in control (if we are to blame, then we can do something about it!). Primitive man blamed himself for not giving enough offerings to his gods, so he made more offerings and atonement. Christian man blamed himself by saying his own sinfulness was being punished by God, so he repented and tried to sin less. So modern man blames his technology for provoking the wrath of nature, and he changes a light bulb or buys a phony carbon offset. The climate and weather on earth have constantly changed over time in both short and long-term cycles (due to the changes in solar output and wobbles in the Earth's rotation - hence alternating ice ages and warming spells). And there were even more drastic climate changes long ago that make today's worries look like child's play. Global warming is nothing new and neither is man's attempt to blame himself for it or any other type of climate change. Instead of wasting our time and effort on trying to change what we don't control (even though many would like to think we do), we should be concentrating on what man has always done in the face of climate change: adapt or die. Use modern technology to be able to survive climate change, not futilely attempt to stop it.

In the past 100 years how much gasoline and coal did we burn? How many gallons of CO2 does this convert too? Is there data available for this? That much amount of carbon was buried deep underground for millions of years. What is the estimated percentage of the total atmosphere does this CO2 amount to? What happens to this CO2 when it enters the atmosphere? It remains there forever. Should/Would there be a change in the atmosphere due to this release of CO2 into atmosphere? Has there been an increase in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere? Would this change have an effect on our climate? Is this emission of CO2 part of the natural cycle going on for millions of years?

And you do not exclude an opportunity of that that the abnormal weather phenomena are influenced with radiowaves proceeding from different sources on the ground, similarly to their influence on whales or effect of microwaves in the furnace?:-) Mat

Thank you WeatherSense. That is exactly what I was thinking. As a geologist I think I know more than the average passerby what is going on with the Earth, some of these cycles might be on 1,000; 10,000 or even 100,000 year cycles. The Milankovitch Cycle is the main global heating and cooling cycle for the last half million years and it operated on a 100,000 year cycle. While these idiots are blabbering about how the rapture is upon us because there have been more dissaters in the last hunderd years, gimmie a break. Also your point about population density is right on the money, it is only a natural disaster is people or infrastructure is affected.

So we can judge her expertise for ourselves, what are Sharon Begley's qualification for opining on the subject of global warming? Being a wordsmith for Newsweek under the tutelage of a Jon Meacham means you write on any subject that meets his agenda, there's no need to have any particular expertise. or even proof, it's not like presenting your thesis to a discerning university committee. Regardless of what the so-called experts say, the earth is its own master, that's an old quote, author unknown to me, but surely true. The age of the globe is indeterminable and our particular brief epoch of concern is as nothing in comparison, despite the protestations of the likes of Al Gore. Al Gore, today's Michael Moore, fat, happy, rich and celebrated. It's not just today's newspapers that are tomorrow's fishwrap, it's also magazines that pretend sophistication but must rely on grandiose speculation to sell. The earth will do what it does, man will have to adapt, if the earth warms, man must devise means to stay cool, if the earth cools, man must devise means to stay warm. That;s not new, cavemen warmed with fire in his cave until he saw the wisdom of moving to a warmer clime, or vice versa, moved to a cooler clime when it became too warm. The government and the media use scare tactics, in 1970 we were to run out of oil and freeze in the dark, today we are awash with oil but freezing in the dark is still a possibility, with the option to avoid that by paying usurious rates for oil.

Newbabygirl2006
Concerning the pair can be and so, but in it (him) is not present heavy metals and huge quantity (amount) of other harmful impurity.

It's unfortunate that this has become such a trendy topic, especially when many of the people (including politicians) hold a firm belief in global warming. I am a Meteorologist, so atleast I can bring some rationale to this article and allow people to decide for themselves. First of all, "accurate" temperature statistics have only been available since the late 1800's and all the statistical analysis that I've read points to ~1 degree F increase over the past 120 years. BUT, the margin of error between older instruments and current is about 1 degree F.....Another thing to look at is simple Geography-more people are living in areas susceptible to severe weather, i.e. the coasts for Hurricanes, midwest for tornadoes. 50 to 100 years back, many of these areas were sparsely populated compared to now.

Why aren't any of these "geniuses" discussing the relationship to an increase in solar flares over the past few years to weather occurances, instead of pointing the finger to global warming? Or, why doesn't the media question the government about their H.A.R.P. program where they are pumping over a billion watts of microwave energy into the Earth's Ionosphere?

Remember the 1970's where pollution was causing "Global Cooling"? Amazing what happens in 30+ years, and it just goes to show you that people can spend Billions of dollars to reduce "Global Warming" instead of using their common sense and having to surrender to natural Earth cycles.

Newbabygirl2006
Concerning the pair can be and so, but in it(him) is not present heavy ?????????????? and huge quantity(amount) of other harmful impurity.

austinbob...where are you getting your information? Cows emit methane which is 23% more harmful to the environment than CO2 is! Cows in just the US are more 'harmful' to the environments than all the SUV's worldwide! Could it be that most environmentalists are also PETA supporters and they don't want a conflict of interest? FACT: Now I'm not in support of eliminating cows. I like steak way too much. But at least it shows you how ludicrous this whole global warming issue is.

The statement, "and tornadoes with a force of F2 or greater have been on the rise since the 1970s, occurring about 8 percent more often every decade," is not universally correct. I did a study of tornadoes in the southeast. The number of F2-F5 tornadoes peaked in the 1970s. While the total number of tornadoes is higher since 1990, the number of F2-F5 tornadoes in Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Louisana, and Arkansas has descreased signficantly. Only Tennessee did not show any decrease. Oklahoma had an increase in the 1990s but a decrease from that in this decade. The larger number of total tornadoes, mostly F0 and F1, are due possibly to better detection devices such as Doppler radar and not to any real increase. For most of the states I looked at, the 1970s was the worst for severe (F2-F5) tornadoes.

I want to answer Turbull the matter is that in Russia the science cannot recover after 1991 yet, and in this problem there practically are not engaged.
Very much many scientists have left on the West, I live in Russia

Good words, ShellyB, and timely spoken, indeed. I can only assume that its not aboit attention anymore. It can be the beginning of, let's say, a judgement,.What do people of CA think, however?