Tuesday, January 7, 2014


"Excessively high temperatures" (are) "already" harming the public health nationwide

"The impacts of climate change -- including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise -- are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies, and public health across the Nation. These impacts are often most significant for communities that already face economic or health-related challenges, and for species and habitats that are already facing other pressures.

"Managing these risks requires deliberate preparation, close cooperation, and coordinated planning by the Federal Government, as well as by stakeholders, to facilitate Federal, State, local, tribal, private-sector, and nonprofit-sector efforts to improve climate preparedness and resilience; help safeguard our economy, infrastructure, environment, and natural resources; and provide for the continuity of executive department and agency (agency) operations, services, and programs."

That was President BO (the amateur president) in November of 2013.

Have you seen the temperatures in the last few days?

Here in Southwest Florida we were in the 30s last night!

When liberals fix a problem, they don't mess around.

Personally, I think they overdid it.


The Gallantwarrior said...

To all my friends up north, I am sorry for the plight you are enduring up there. I tried though. I drove my old truck that gets 15 mpg a lot, I refused to recycle, I used more electricity this year, I still have incandescent light bulbs, I ate a LOT of beef and pork and still you are suffering from global cooling. If I'd ONLY thought to maybe burn a half-dozen tires or something! Maybe some coal too? But I did try guys, I really did.
Part of the problem is an emotional/intellectual brain barrier that prevents many from recognizing reality outside our own emotions and taught values. It is a matter of projectionism threatening the life of the person with rose colored glasses. For survival, we need to do more than wait for the effects of fatal reality to break those glasses, we must do all we can to educate the ostriches. We will be accused of intolerance, fear-mongering, etc., and should not count on rewards of any sort from those we may help; just settle for satisfaction of seeing our families and great nation saved, and, if we like, a warm smugness in being able to say in the good times of victory, I told you so. Disagree with me if you must, I cannot force you to be right.

The Owl said...

Global Warming????
lets look at these botched forecasts.
I presented the forecasts from the moron egghead liberal academia types from the first "earth day" (actually should be called smoking pot, pissing and shitting in a field for a week and thinking that is doing something for the planet day) in 1970. Back then it was about all of those "educated liberals" all saying the earth would be frozen.

Well, in the similar spirit (similar yet 180 degrees exact opposite) lets look at what these morons predicted over the last 20 years....shall we?

1. Within a few years "children just aren't going to know what snow is." Snowfall will be "a very rare and exciting event." Dr. David Viner, senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, interviewed by the UK Independent, March 20, 2000.

2."By 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots…[By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers." Michael Oppenheimer, published in "Dead Heat," St. Martin's Press, 1990.

3. "Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide two degrees by 2010." Associated Press, May 15, 1989.


Let us look at some of those other classics from these know it all hippies, who continue to prove to the world (ironically they never prove it to themselves) from the so called "earth day (smoking pot, pissing and shitting in a field for a week thinking I am doing something for the planet day).

1. "If present trends continue, the world will be ... eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age." Kenneth E.F. Watt, in "Earth Day," 1970.

2. "By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half." Life magazine, January 1970.

3. "Arctic specialist Bernt Balchen says a general warming trend over the North Pole is melting the polar ice cap and may produce an ice-free Arctic Ocean by the year 2000." Christian Science Monitor, June 8, 1972.

4. "By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people ... If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." Ehrlich, Speech at British Institute For Biology, September 1971.

5. "In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish." Ehrlich, speech during Earth Day, 1970
Remember, Abraham and his types claim the reason the ship got stuck in the ice and the reason the ice is so thick that even cutter ships got stuck is because of THE GLOBAL WARMING!!!!!

OK, Strap ourselves in, cause we are going to hear some more

sue hanes said...

Joe - Are there any other problems you'd like for us to fix?
Just let us know.

Xavier Onassis said...

You gotta love it when people who choose to remain willfully ignorant feel the need to sound like they know what they are talking about.

The term "global warming" referes to the AVERAGE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE.

For those of you who don't understand technical terms like "average", this does not mean that every spot on the globe will increase in temperature at a steady rate until everything isreally hot everywhere.

Look at a globe. 75% of the Earth is water. When we talk about the average global temperature what that really means is the temperature of the world's oceans.

The temperature of the water on Earth controls how the air above that water moves and how much or little water vapor it carries with it. This (not gay marriage) is how hurricanes form.

When you change the average temperature of the world's oceans, it has an impact on global weather patterns. Specifically the jet stream.

What this means is that some places that normally don't get very hot, will get very hot. And other places that don't get very cold, will get very cold.

Weather patterns that used to be fairly predictable, will become wildly UNpredictable.

That is why you are starting to hear meteorologists use terms they have never had to use before.

Like "Superstorm", "Polar Vortex" and "Arctic Hurricane".

Try turning off Fox News and reading a book.

Joe said...

sh: Yours is the only comment worthy of response. That was funny!

Craig said...

I was out on the mean streets of Minneapolis last night. Several banks and such have signs flashing the time and temp. They ranged from -12 to -20 (air temp, not wind chill. Wind chill is for wusses). I'm not sure there's much difference between -12 and -20. It's mighty brisk.

Heat wave today, sitting at -2. 120 F in western Australia today, so there's that.

Joe said...

Craig: "...sitting at -2. 120 F in western Australia..."

That's an average of 61 degrees.

Craig said...

That's comparing only 2 places on the globe. From NOAA,

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for September–November was the second highest on record for this period, behind 2005, at 1.22°F (0.68°C) above the 20th century average of 57.1°F (14.0°C)

Are you telling me it's worse than I thought?

Joe said...

XP: "...Weather patterns that used to be fairly predictable..."

With modern technology they have become far less so.

Craig: It IS worse than you thought. You thought, and wanted, it was becoming warmer, when in practicality it is averaging out to the the same or a little cooler.

But no matter. Which ever, it is man's fault. What we need to do is to do away with mankind. Do you want to go first?

Craig said...

when in practicality it is averaging out to the the same or a little cooler.

No, it isn't.

Why would I want that?

Duckys here said...

Joe, are you under the impression that climate change has predicted the end of winter?

Anyway, an arctic trough can easily form. We've largely missed it on the East coast and yesterday it hit 60 in Boston. The snow from the last storm is pretty much gone.

Meanwhile the temp in Rio has been unbearably and dangerously warm.

Come on Joe, this is an important topic and you shouldn't indulge in your shallow analysis.

Joe said...

Ducky: Sorry you missed the point (again). Liberals impose certain rules and regulations because they think they can stop or reverse global something or other because the bad part of it is man-made. It is snowing, therefore liberals must have fixed it. Go ahead. Take the credit. We don't mind.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "Liberals impose certain rules and regulations because they think they can stop or reverse global something or other because the bad part of it is man-made"

Yes. If man made activity has tipped the global scale in one direction, then man made activity can tip the global scale in the other direction.

What part of that simple logic do you not understand?

Joe said...

XO: Why are you arguing with me? I said you did it. You fixed it! The evidence is covering 90% of the country. We are even close to freezing in Southwest Florida! Congratulations! What more could you want? Your accomplishments are remarkable! How will we respond to the brilliance that is yours? Tell us, wise one!

Duckys here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Duckys here said...

XO, trying to explain the idea of climate extremes to Joe is a difficult task.

I don't think I can get anywhere with him and feel I've let down the team.

He seems to feel this is the first time the south has experienced the effects of an arctic trough.

Aggregate change seems like a simple concept, no?

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - No, nothing has been fixed. Because conservatives refuse to admit that humans are even capable of having an impact on the climate.

Conservatives think that the Earth is so HUGE and VAST that we mere mortals couldn't POSSIBLY change what God has created and continues to manage and maintain in our behalf.

Well that's B.S. and there is plenty of climate science to prove it.

The fact that we are in the throes of an arctic hurricane is further evidence that the increase in global ocean temperatures has weakened the jet stream (as predicted by global climate change models) which has allowed the arctic weather pattern to reach parts of North America that it couldn't reach before.

I really wish you were capable of understanding actual scientific research instead of just regurgitating crap you read on right wing conspiracy web sites.

You are a smart guy. You deserve better sources of information than what you seem to be willfully limiting yourself to.

Expand your horizons Joe. The truth is out there.

Joe said...

XO: "Well that's B.S. and there is plenty of climate science to prove it.."

In as much as I usually delete comments with foul language,I am going to assume that by "B.S." You meant Barbra Streisand.

Here's what I know: If science is to be believed (and, yes, there is some doubt in my mind about that), long before mankind was a factor, there were ice ages, hot ages, polar flips, way more volcanic eruptions, acid seas, no sand (since rocks had not yet been eroded),there was water everywhere at one time or another(at virtually EVERY dig fossils are found of oceanic or water oriented creatures) and fanciful animals of every imaginable kind.

Man (according to science) came along late in the process and messed up everything. So the solution is to get rid of man.

I invited Craig to go first, but he has not responded as willing. Would you like to be a good role model and take the lead?

Joe said...

XO: BTW, is that Arctic vortex also responsible for the substantial increase in Antarctic ice as well?

Is it also responsible for those global warming studying ice breakers that got stuck in Antarctica?

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "...long before mankind was a factor, there were ice ages, hot ages, polar flips, way more volcanic eruptions, acid seas..."

Yes. All of that is true. We know this through a variety of scientific methods like ice core samples and geologic layering.

All of which would only confuse and befuddle you since it wasn't written down on parchment thousands of years ago by bronze age goat herders.

"... no sand (since rocks had not yet been eroded)..."

I've never heard the "Sandless Earth" theory. Sounds like one of those ridiculous Creationist arguments like "Where did eyeballs come from?" or "Israelites riding dinosaurs"

"...,there was water everywhere at one time or another(at virtually EVERY dig fossils are found of oceanic or water oriented creatures) and fanciful animals of every imaginable kind..."

This is partially true, but not why you probably think.

It was NOT, I repeat, NOT due to some catastrophic, world-wide flood that engulfed the entire planet depositing sea creature fossils on mountaintops.

It was because what are now mountains used to be seabeds and it took billions of years of plate tectonic movement to raise those mountains above the current sea level taking the fossils with them.

"Man (according to science) came along late in the process and messed up everything. So the solution is to get rid of man."

All of the climactic changes you mentioned in the beginning took place over millions of years. A change that only took hundreds of thousands of years is considered "sudden" in geological terms.

The changes we are seeing today that are increasing the average temperature of the world's oceans, increasing the CO2 levels in the atmosphere, punching holes in the ozone layer and causing wildly unpredictable shifts in previously predictable weather patterns have all taken place with unprecedented acceleration in just the last 100 years.

These changes were caused by human, industrial activity. There is absolutely no credible question about this.

But the answer is not to "get rid of man".

The answer is for man to stop destroying the very planet and environment that gave birth to them and sustains them.

But, I guess that solution doesn't carry much weight with people who don't care about the planet because they believe some bearded Sky Daddy is going to come along and whisk them away from the consequences of their earthly actions so they can spend all eternity in the most awkward and intolerable family reunion imaginable.

Xavier Onassis said...

BTW - I'm not sure you understand the difference between Arctic and Antarctic, otherwise you wouldn't have asked such silly questions.