Al Gore is fat

Predictably enough, yesterdays’ snow storms prove that Al Gore is fat. Steve Benen has the details. I can’t get enough of this stuff. Here’s question: who is the most serious person who has used a snowstorm to make Al Gore jokes? Has Bobo ever done it, for example?

97 replies
  1. 1
    Cargo says:

    We can have record high temperature averages for years, but one cold day disproves all of global warming forever. Oh and climatologist emails.

  2. 2
    The Ithacan says:

    I was in Atlanta the other day and the hotel shuttle driver started regaling me with Fox news climatology. I used to just bite my tongue.

    No more. I busted out the weather/climate distinction and would not let up on him until I got to my stop.

    He thanked me (?sincerity?) when I got off

    I have to speak up, I can see that now

  3. 3
    jurassicpork says:

    What if they say that they’ll never surrender? Even liberal progressives like Jean Quan have given their answer. #OWS has tested the mettle and allegiance of political leaders and they’ve all failed.

  4. 4
    forked tongue says:

    Well, Bill O’Reilly’s done it. I think it’s fair to say that he and David Brooks are about equally serious.

  5. 5
    S. cerevisiae says:

    Someone in Benen’s comments posted this link which shows how warming in the arctic has destabilized mid-latitude weather patterns.

  6. 6
    Anya says:

    I am betting on George Will.

  7. 7
    Anoniminous says:

    Expecting ignorant know-nothings to cognize “stuff” is productive only of frustration. @S. cerevisiae: gave a link which blows the Denialists out of the water, but since they don’t understand it, they can’t include the information in their thinking.

    And it’s as much as their job is worth to know what they are talking about. Too. Also.

  8. 8
    Walker says:

    @Anya:

    He certainly is the most “serious” climate denier out there.

  9. 9
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    My money’s on Bill Kristol (which might need a call from the Serious Refs), Charles Lane or one the other Peretz alumni who went to work for Fred Hiatt.

  10. 10
    Scott says:

    Fuckers sure were quiet when most of the Southwest sat through a record-breaking summer-long heatwave and drought.

  11. 11
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @S. cerevisiae:

    Science, it’s just another belief system.

  12. 12
    Anya says:

    @Walker: He tries to mask his nastiness with his pompous sesquipedalian prose.

  13. 13
    James says:

    Well, first of all, they aren’t jokes. But Krauhammer and George Will, if you consider them “serious.” or Serious.

  14. 14
    barkleyg says:

    The difference between a REPUG denier and a Liberal believer
    in “global warming”

    The Reug says SNOW, for what single digit time in the last 100 years in October shows(PROVES) there aint no stinking Global Warming!

    To me, the snow in October shows we are having “freaky, non-seasonal” weather events at an ever increasing pace, and this does show the Climate is Changing.

    Global warming is the cause; snow in October shows that Global warming is really global “weather” changes, brought on by ever increasing average temps, that I, personally, think Man is the MAIN Contributor!

  15. 15
    Svensker says:

    The difference between a REPUG denier and a Liberal believer
    in “global warming”

    You don’t “believe” in global warming. You think that the scientists are being as rigorous as possible and that they have based their conclusions on sound work that has been tested and peer reviewed.

    Wingers try to cast “global warming” as a faith based on political orientation. It isn’t.

  16. 16
    arguingwithsignposts says:

    Ari Fleischer, recently hired by CNN to be one of the more respectable Republican voices, went there, too.

    bwahahahaha

  17. 17
    S. cerevisiae says:

    It’s so refreshing to see sane people commenting. If you are a glutton for punishment go check out the comments on any Yahoo story involving climate. Yahoo is right…

  18. 18
    The Moar You Know says:

    that I, personally, think Man is the MAIN Contributor

    Here’s the deal, Barkley. No one should give a shit what you “think”. I don’t. What you “think” about global climate change is as irrelevant as the thoughts of the most ardent denialist out there. What matters is what the science shows, and at this point in history the science is pretty unambiguous.

    Don’t bring personal belief into this debate. It’s completely irrelevant.

  19. 19
    Satanicpanic says:

    But I thought everyone agreed there is warming, but that we don’t know the cause. Or is that not the case?

  20. 20
    barkleyg says:

    The Moar You Know – October 30, 2011 | 2:48 pm · Link

    I don’t give a shit what you think(?) either, so”
    and at this point in history the science is pretty unambiguous” means WHAT?

    Sounds STRAWMAN to me!

  21. 21
    barkleyg says:

    The Moar You Know – October 30, 2011 | 2:48 pm · Link

    I don’t give a shit what you think(?) either, so”

    and at this point in history the science is pretty unambiguous”

    means WHAT?

    Sounds STRAWMAN to me!

  22. 22
    slag says:

    @Satanicpanic: The case is this: There is no global warming, but If there is global warming, it’s not caused by people, but if it is caused by people, the free market fairy will take care of it. QED.

  23. 23
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @slag:

    The “free market” in this case is sort of like you taking your hands of the steering wheel when you hit glare ice.

    Que sera, sera.

  24. 24
    slag says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: Yes. It is the thing you resort to when you know that you and your tribe will never feel the consequences and may even benefit.

  25. 25
    ppcli says:

    @Satanicpanic:
    Well, yes and no. There are a bunch of positions:

    a) There is no warming at all.

    b) There is warming, but it is all part of a standard longterm weather cycle.

    c) There is warming, and it is not part of a standard weather cycle, but man is not the cause.

    d) There is warming, and it is not part of a standard weather cycle and man is (at least partially) the cause, but the man-made component is not significant enough to warrant any intervention that will interfere with the economy.

    e) There is warming, and it is not part of a standard weather cycle and man is almost entirely the cause, but the predicted continuations and consequences are exaggerated and not significant enough to warrant any intervention that will interfere with the economy.

    (There are lots of subvarieties, but that will do to illustrate.) Now all of these are very distinct positions. One of the reasons that “denialists” should be called “denialists” is that they don’t seem at all concerned to find out which of a) – e) is actually true. In fact, they make every effort to run a) – e) together, because their objectives are served by confusing the issue rather than clarifying it. The most “serious” climate deniers adopt something in the c) – e) range. The guy at MIT whose name I can’t recall, who is counted as the heaviest hitter on the denial side, holds a view that is something in the quite mild d) – e) range, yet he is routinely cited as supporting “the side”, as one of the “thousands of scientists who…blah blah” even though what he actually supports is very different from and much milder than what most of the people on that side claim.

    The a) position is so discredited that even know-nothing hacks like John Stoeffel acknowledge it is hopeless to defend. But even if the “hey, it’s way colder than I expected today” remark had any cogency, it would only have cogency supporting a). That the more “respectable” deniers don’t make this point when their allies spread ignorance indicates that their objective is not really to find out what is happening, but to slow down the process of finding out what is happening. On the occasions where that slowing down is facilitated by sowing confusion rather than light, they’re fine with that.

  26. 26

    I’ll see your snow in October in Baltimore weather event and raise you a bunch of maple trees still completely covered in green leaves in Vermont.

  27. 27
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Comrade Javamanphil:

    There you go, bringing empirical data into the conversation again.

  28. 28
    Reality Check says:

    Whatever AGW is, it ceased to be science a long time ago. Now it’s just a millennial religious cult with its devout followers praying to the Earth Goddess to punish man for his wicked ways. Nothing more than the Rapture for the Upper West Side set.

  29. 29
    piratedan says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: now it’ll be tawdry stories about how dogs and cats are living in peaceful harmony too…..

  30. 30
    soonergrunt says:

    Let us not forget our own pet denialist, “Reality Check”. He’s always good for a goofy spot of weather/climate confusion.

  31. 31
    Reality Check says:

    @soonergrunt:

    Translation: “I can’t wait for the Rapture when I will be taken up into the clouds to meet Jesus and you heathens will be Left Behind”…oh, whoops, wrong hocus-pocus religion.

  32. 32
    Reality Check says:

    And yeah, weather isn’t climate, unless we’re talking about wildfires in California, droughts in Texas, or tornadoes in Missouri, then the Warmists can’t shut the fuck up about weather.

  33. 33
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Reality Check:

    The slime mold is out of the petri dish again.

  34. 34
    Jebediah says:

    @Reality Check:
    Ceased to be science? Got any evidence for that? Praying to the earth goddess to punish man? Got any examples?
    You seem to be losing steam – you’re not trying to make arguments anymore, you’re just farting and running away. Trolling getting too taxing for your little brain?

  35. 35
    Reality Check says:

    @Jebediah:

    It’s a religion through and through, it has a Fall (pollution) from eating at the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (the industrial revolution), sin (carbon emissions), prophets (Al Gore), an apocalypse (including fire and flooding!) and even indulgences (“Carbon offsets”). Environmentalism even has its own Kosher (“organic” and “free range”). It’s a religion for leftists. I could go on but I think the point is clear. Warmism is a religion.

  36. 36
    Reality Check says:

    Oh, and it even has “Satan” (the Koch Brothers).

  37. 37
    Jebediah says:

    @Reality Check:

    Warmism is a religion.

    I wasn’t aware that “religion” means “based strictly on empirical observation.” Thanks for cluing me in.

  38. 38
    Reality Check says:

    @Jebediah:

    Yes, because apocalyptic speculation based on garbage-in garbage-out computer models and manipulated data ids “empirical observation”.

  39. 39
    chines says:

    Bobo is part of the school of yes, there is global warming, yes it is man-made, but government will totally fail at any efforts to fix it. http://www.grist.org/green-job.....green-jobs

  40. 40
    Sly says:

    @forked tongue:
    Has Bill O’Reilly been to the Aspen Ideas Festival? That’s the only barometer of Seriousness that I will accept!

  41. 41
    Marty says:

    @Reality Check: Okay, how about you put some money on your position. Buy some low-lying real estate on the Gulf of Mexico, or some farmland in Texas. Prices are strangely low these days.

    No? Not interested? What a surprise.

  42. 42
    Comrade Mary says:

    I’ll see green leaves in Vermont and raise you tomatoes and raspberries still ripening in Toronto.

  43. 43
    mere mortal says:

    “but one cold day disproves all of global warming forever.”

    It’s worse than that. This was a freak snowstorm, not even a freak cold snap. If you look at weather sites like Weather Underground, the low temperatures where these snowfalls hit were right around normal for this time of year, and way higher than the record lows.

    Not that a record low temperature or a cold snap would disprove global warming, but just saying that the deniers are being extra stupid / dishonest here.

  44. 44
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @Reality Check:

    This putting your fingers in your ear and saying “la la la I can’t hear you!” stuff is getting pretty stale.

  45. 45
    ppcli says:

    @Reality Check: OK RC, we can take one step toward clarity instead of fog, perhaps. Since you are, it appears, enough of an expert to adjudicate the accuracy of the computer models used by climate scientists, and are sufficiently aware of the state of the science to justify a claim to the effect that these predictions (by hundreds of scientists, in hundreds of research facilities) are *all* based on “manipulated data”, how about you tell us which of these five positions from my above post you actually believe to be correct. An informed fellow like you could teach us a lot:

    a) There is no warming at all.

    b) There is warming, but it is all part of a standard longterm weather cycle.

    c) There is warming, and it is not part of a standard weather cycle, but man is not the cause.

    d) There is warming, and it is not part of a standard weather cycle and man is (at least partially) the cause, but the man-made component is not significant enough to warrant any intervention that will interfere with the economy.

    e) There is warming, and it is not part of a standard weather cycle and man is almost entirely the cause, but the predicted continuations and consequences are exaggerated and not significant enough to warrant any intervention that will interfere with the economy.

  46. 46
    Reality Check says:

    @ppcli:

    Answer this first:

    a) the snowstorm just shows weather is not climate!

    b) the snowstorm is *actually the result* of climate change just like we predicted all along!

    c) cold snaps and snowstorms are weather and don’t count, but hurricanes in August are CLIMATE and backed by SCIENCE!

    Have fun.

  47. 47
    Reality Check says:

    BTW, it doesn’t matter what we do even if your bullshit was true–China and India are putting online one new coal power plant every day on average. That’s right–COAL. Black, carbon-filled, dirty, soot fucking COAL power plants.

  48. 48
    Reality Check says:

    And China is now the world’s largest car market. Twenty MILLION cars sold this year alone, it could go as high as FIFTY MILLION by 2030. And what kind of cars there sell? BMWs. Porches. Big-ass Buicks, and big, dirty, gas-guzzling SUVs pouring millions of pounds of carbon right into Mother Earth’s fucking face. And there’s nothing you can do about it.

  49. 49
    ppcli says:

    @Comrade Mary: I’ll see your green leaves in Vermont and raspberries ripening in Toronto, and I’ll raise the observation (empirical, no less) by a half-dozen wilderness guides and serious fishermen I know across northern Ontario from Kenora to North Bay: for the last thirty years, the lower boundary of the streams where you can get speckled trout has been moving northward at the rate of a few kilometers every couple of years. This is just an anecdote, of course, from nonscientists. Could be overinterpreting events. But I’m sure if this is actually happening systematically, the Ministry of Natural Resources is aware of it and tracking it.

  50. 50
    ppcli says:

    @Reality Check:
    Sure. a) Snowstorm shows nothing one way or the other. That weather is not climate is a matter of the meaning of words.
    b)no – see a)
    c) Anyone who has made the claim you suggest people are making (a given hurricane reveals all sorts of stuff about global climate patterns) has made a mistake. I’m confident that no serious scientist has done this, unless they have other premises up their sleeves. That is different from making the rhetorical point “Well, if the big snowstorm is supposed to show something about global warming, why are Fox news and Reality Check so silent about the wildfires?”

    OK, now it is your turn.

  51. 51
    Reality Check says:

    @ppcli:

    Please explain this, then:

    http://www.impawards.com/2006/....._truth.jpg

  52. 52
    ppcli says:

    @Reality Check: I’m supposed to explain why it reads “Access forbidden”? That’s a tough one, and I’ll admit I’m stumped.

    But it’s your turn. Answer the question at 45 – it’s absolutely basic. If you know as much as you claim you should be able to support an opinion.

  53. 53
    Reality Check says:

    @ppcli:

    F) Warmism is a bullshit religion, a combination of a rouse to shove “progressive” policies down people’s throats in the name of “saving the planet” based on manipulated, bullshit data and also some amount of liberal guilt.

    Now read what i wrote about China. How do you feel about those big-ass, huge, giant, COAL power plants going online everyday? Or all those new, big, gass-guzzling cars being scooped up by consumers in India and China? Mad?

  54. 54
    Yevgraf says:

    I just spent a week in Churchill to see polar bears and other tundra life. The ice has been forming later each year, keeping the bears by the shore now about three weeks later than previously, and the melt occurs earlier. The upshot is that they will starve to death if this trend continues.

    But hey, if we crush polar bears so that some Textard can drive his mammoth SUV from his Plano McMansion to his Dallas high rise, so long as libruls are pissed off, then it is worth it.

  55. 55
    OzoneR says:

    @Reality Check:

    And there’s nothing you can do about it.

    we can NOT be part of the problem. We can do that.

    Besides that, if we create new, cheap, clean means of making energy and travelling, guess what, so will China and India.

    But instead of being a leader, your theory is “Well China and India are going libtards, so suck it!” As long as we liberals are sad, right?

    Hilariously pathetic. I’m not nearly as bleeding heart as you think. I take some satisfaction in watching Texas burn. Jesus save them yet?

  56. 56
    ppcli says:

    @Reality Check: Nice try. Can’t even answer the most basic question. Instead, you change the subject and throw fog around. The first sign of someone who has a limited range of talking points gleaned from elsewhere and doesn’t actually have a clue what s/he’s talking about. No time to waste with such people.
    Seeya.

  57. 57
    toujoursdan says:

    Let’s see:

    1) Ice caps in the Arctic are melting at an ever-increasing rate.

    2) Towns in the Arctic have had all kinds of infrastructure problems because of melting permafrost for years.

    3) Pacific island nations are being flooded by rising sea levels.

    4) Coral reefs are being “bleached” from higher ocean temperatures.

    5) Both long term satellite and ground observations are showing a warming in the average temperature of the Earth.

    There is no evidence that the data scientists are working with is “garbage in”. Saying so (because your right-wing commentator of choice tells you to) doesn’t make it true.

    97% of climate scientists say that climate change is happening. There is evidence of it all over the earth. Yet a few pundits and economists (and idiots who confuse weather and climate) say that it isn’t. Hmmm… Who to believe…

    Denialism is a religion. Affirming climate change is happening is based on observation.

  58. 58
    Reality Check says:

    @toujoursdan:

    97% of climate scientists say that climate change is happening.BUT THERE ARE EIGHTY EIGHT REASONS THE RAPTURE WILL BE IN ’88!

  59. 59
    Reality Check says:

    I know I’ll be doing my part to raise as many tons of carbon as possible, that’s for sure.

  60. 60
    soonergrunt says:

    @Reality Check: You could shoot yourself. You’d have a hell of a smaller carbon footprint and your energy bill would go down significantly.
    That’s a win-win if I’ve ever heard of one. I’d settle for you being raptured, though.

  61. 61
    OzoneR says:

    @Reality Check:

    I know I’ll be doing my part to raise as many tons of carbon as possible, that’s for sure.

    Look, I don’t hate you, don’t make me mad, I’m not pissed off.

    I feel sorry for you actually. I’ve been there, I’ve been you. It’s terrible to be so full of hate and ugliness. To have such a low opinion of yourself and mankind that you need to kick a liberal to feel like somebody, that you need someone to look down upon so you don’t feel so small. I hope, for you sake, your life gets better at some point, cause its so much better when you’re not consumed by darkness.

  62. 62
    Reality Check says:

    @soonergrunt:

    I try to make my carbon footprint as big as possible, thanks. Though I don’t think I could ever get it as big as Al Gore’s.

  63. 63
    Reality Check says:

    @OzoneR:

    “Accept Jesus Mother Earth into your heart! I was once a sinner like you but now I am SAVED!”

  64. 64
    OzoneR says:

    @Reality Check: I never said you could be saved. You’re beyond that, which is why I feel sorry for you.

    If it makes you feel good about yourself to go on a blog and try to make a liberal cry, then go ahead and do it, it’s just sad that you feel the need to do it though, really sad.

    That’s the thing about conservatives, for so-called patriots, they’re incredibly cowardly and full of self-loathing.

  65. 65
    Uriel says:

    @Reality Check:

    “Accept Jesus Mother Earth into your heart! I was once a sinner like you but now I am SAVED!”

    You go, man! Keep shoving that square peg into that round hole! It doesn’t make you look like an idiot at all!

  66. 66
    toujoursdan says:

    @Reality Check:

    I have always maintained that right-wingers are the ultimate post modernists. There are no facts. What can be observed by the naked eye isn’t to be believed. There is no accepted source of data that can used to settle a debate. There is no such thing as empirical truth. Everything, and I mean everything, is a matter opinion.

    It’s an incredibly sloppy and ego-centric way of thinking.

    There is absolutely nothing conservative about today’s conservatives. They embrace economic theories that have never actually existed and can only work on paper. They reject the scientific method (except for the convenient science that gave them vaccines, cancer treatments, fertility treatments, microwave ovens and x-rays.) They don’t believe in any truths and facts don’t exist. It’s nothing but rootless modernism.

  67. 67
    licensed to kill time says:

    I’m sure everyone here realizes that RC has zero interest in any honest dialogue. It’s simply futile to argue with it.

    This Check on Reality is only digestible when submerged deep within the pie. Then it’s just funny, and tasty, too!

  68. 68
    Phoenician in a time of Romans says:

    As I pointed out to wingnuts the last time this showed up, with actual cites from the reports, the predictions are for greater climate volatility, and for North America, more snow when it snows due to greater moisture content in the air sweeping in to meet cold fronts.

    Which means monster snow storms in NA help confirm global warming predictions. The problem is that wingnuts reduce everything to the silliest soundbite and then rail if reality doesn’t match up.

  69. 69
    S. cerevisiae says:

    @Reality Check: Keep fucking that chicken.

  70. 70
    MikeJ says:

    @Phoenician in a time of Romans:

    the predictions are for greater climate volatility

    Heat in the atmosphere means more energy in the atmosphere. The idea that warming makes freaky winter storms shouldn’t be the least be controversial or hard to explain, except to those who won’t accept it no matter what.

  71. 71
    Reality Check says:

    @Phoenician in a time of Romans:

    Spoken like a true cultist: “this confirms what we thought all along!” Moron.

  72. 72
    toujoursdan says:

    @MikeJ:

    More heat also leads to more evaporation from lakes and oceans, which means there is more moisture in the atmosphere for storm systems to work with. So bigger snowstorms and flood events are to be expected. The temperatures in the Northeast yesterday were nowhere near record lows. The only thing exceptional were the snowfall totals.

  73. 73
    Reality Check says:

    @toujoursdan:

    Of course if there were fewer snowstorms, you’d say that’s expected, too. It explains all, just like any good religion.

  74. 74
    toujoursdan says:

    @Reality Check:

    In some place there will be fewer snowstorms. It know this is hard for your tiny brain to grasp but the earth’s climate is very, very, very, very complex, which is why climate scientists have to take advanced math, and why the government uses supercomputers for modelling. When you have air currents interacting with land, water and mountains, it introduces all kinds of local and global variables. A changing climate is going to affect different places in different ways depending on the local topography.

    A religion is based on a set of unprovable beliefs about supernatural things. Climate statements are based on observation and established rules of physics and chemistry. When you call climate science a “religion”, it just shows that you don’t have clue what either science or religion is.

  75. 75
    Phoenician in a time of Romans says:

    @Reality Check:

    It’s a religion through and through, it has a Fall (pollution) from eating at the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (the industrial revolution), sin (carbon emissions), prophets (Al Gore), an apocalypse (including fire and flooding!) and even indulgences (“Carbon offsets”). Environmentalism even has its own Kosher (“organic” and “free range”). It’s a religion for leftists. I could go on but I think the point is clear. Warmism is a religion.

    My God – you’re right.

    And WW II against the Japanese never occurred either. After all, it had a Fall (Pearl Harbor) from eating at the the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (increased military buildups), sin (fascism), prophets (radar operators), an apocalypse (two actually, one in Hiroshima and one in Nagasaki) and indulgences (war bonds).

    Or, alternatively, you’re both an ignorant fool and a mendacious little twerp.

  76. 76
    Phoenician in a time of Romans says:

    @Reality Check:

    Spoken like a true cultist: “this confirms what we thought all along!” Moron.

    Uh-huh. So when scientists make a prediction which is borne out in actual observations, this is “cultist” to you, you idiot?

    Get it through your thick skull – they were predicting greater snow storms as a RESULT of climate change.
    See here http://www.livescience.com/117.....torms.html

  77. 77
    Uncle Clarence Thomas says:

    .
    .
    @Phoenician in a time of Romans:

    You can call him “Ptolemy in a time of Copernicus.” I call him “RC Cola.”
    .
    .

  78. 78
    toujoursdan says:

    @Phoenician in a time of Romans:

    Ohhh that’s a fun game. Can I play?

    So the link between cancer and smoking is a religion too. There was a snake (tobacco companies) that led to a fall into sin (people addicted to smoking), a Satan (tobacco companies and their lobbyists/lawyers), prophets (anti-smoking agencies), sin (smoking), redemption (kicking the habit) and sacraments (tobacco patches/gum), a moral code (smoking bans).

    How about germs and disease?

    There was a fall (germs, which are a scientific conspiracy obviously), sin (diseases), redemption (cleanliness), prophets (doctors, silly), indulgences (antiseptics) and redemption from sin (vaccines, penicillin).

  79. 79
    gnomedad says:

    @Svensker:

    You don’t “believe” in global warming. You think that the scientists are being as rigorous as possible and that they have based their conclusions on sound work that has been tested and peer reviewed.

    A zillion times this.

  80. 80

    My wormhole for a mobile version of the pie filter.

  81. 81
    Cermet says:

    Why feed a troll? Especially one as stupid as this one that just manages to sound like a fart of the koch butt f’ing brothers. Wasting time arguing with these types of losers is a lot like farting – some temporary relief but it just sticks up the air.

  82. 82
    Yutsano says:

    @Cermet: Farting at least serves a necessary biological function.

  83. 83
    SRW1 says:

    That RC puppet is really getting his/her ego stroked here, isn’t s/he. Appears at one third of the thread and after that it’s all about him/her.

  84. 84
    ornery says:

    Another lesson in why not to feed the trolls.

    Unless this thread was a clever spoof on the entire Climate Debate, lol … in which case, bravo!

  85. 85
    MikeJ says:

    @Ben Cisco (mobile): If you use firefox on your mobile device it should work. You’ll need to use scriptish instead of greasemonkey though.

  86. 86
    Bill Arnold says:

    @toujoursdan:

    The temperatures in the Northeast yesterday were nowhere near record lows. The only thing exceptional were the snowfall totals.

    Pretty much. The first frost (hudson valley), 2 days before the snow IIRC, was about a week or two later than was normal through my life in the area, and I live further north. Oh nos, global warming. (Also, the summer had some very hot weeks, oh nos.) The northeaster didn’t get below freezing here until 5 or 6 PM. (The only climate signal of significance locally is that growing zones have moved north a ways.)
    RC is trying me. If they really believe this stuff, then are a pretty hidebound mentally. I mean, the basic physics are not hard. People who deny that increased levels of CO2 (& methane and other GHGes) have a warming effect need to show their models. At this point, the real arguments appear to be around how large (and what sign) the feedback effects are.

  87. 87

    @Villago Delenda Est: Well, that’s what it’s all about! If only people would…

  88. 88
    Waynski says:

    @S. cerevisiae: Bravo. Your comment is the only way to deal with RC. I advise others to stop all attempts to educate him/her and bang your heads against a concrete wall. It will be infinitely more productive.

  89. 89
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @soonergrunt: If the rapture occurs, and the rest of us cheer when the “Christians” are taken away, will God put them back to torture us? As for the real Christians, if it occurs, congratulations.

  90. 90
    Satanicpanic says:

    The link between higher temps and more snow seems pretty simple to me, if you accept that
    1) There is a range of temperatures below zero- water will freeze at -10 or 31 degrees. So parts of the atmosphere can be both- Hotter and still below freezing. At some point, it will be so hot that it WILL stop snowing. This hasn’t happened everywhere yet, because these things aren’t uniform.
    2) Hotter temps mean more moisture in the air. Every child has seen the rain cycle diagram- water evaporates over the ocean, then is carried over land, it gets colder and there is precipitation.

    This stuff is really pretty simple if you think about it. But obviously, some people are trying not to think about it.

  91. 91
    soonergrunt says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): In the unlikely event that the rapture occurs, I’m taking their shit. Of course, I don’t know anyone who is anticipating the rapture with any sense of joy or happiness who would actually qualify to be raptured. All of the ones I know who can’t wait for it to happen would never be judged worthy by the Prince of Peace.
    Of course, they never do get around the fact that only 144,000 people will be raptured up. Out of 7 billion, more or less. So that’s like 2.057×10(^-5) or 0.00000205 of the world population.
    Hell, would anybody even notice?

  92. 92
    Jack says:

    @slag:

    It’s multiple defenses:

    1. I don’t have a dog.
    2. Yes, I have a dog, but that wasn’t him.
    3. Yes, that was my dog, but he doesn’t bite.

  93. 93
    Ruckus says:

    @soonergrunt:
    Hell, would anybody even notice?

    Those of us left behind would be much happier that the annoying buzzing of their stupidity was gone.

  94. 94
    soonergrunt says:

    @Ruckus: What I’m saying is that the really annoying ones wouldn’t qualify to go, and would just keep on doing what they’re doing. We’d be four years into the tribulation before anybody figured it out, and these motherfuckers would argue and fight like hell at the thought that they were left behind with the rest of us.

  95. 95
    Ruckus says:

    @soonergrunt:
    You said rapture, I thought you said rupture and was hoping that all the pustules would be going.

  96. 96
    RalfW says:

    All I gotta say is 100 and f*ckin 9 in Houston in August. 109.

    But that gets forgotten in a nanosecond by these buttmunches.

  97. 97
    ned says:

    @Reality Check:
    Personally, I find it’s the filling that makes a good pie, but I suppose the crust is important, too. YMMV, tool.

Comments are closed.