An attempt by two men from northern Minnesota to cross the Arctic Ocean to call attention to global warming ended this morning because of poor weather conditions.
Lonnie Dupre, 43, and Eric Larsen, 33, were forced to abandon their planned 100-day, 1,200-mile trek after encountering unexpectedly heavy snow storms, strong winds and unusual ice conditions, according to Jane Kochersperger, a media officer with the environmental group Greenpeace, which co-sponsored the trip.
|
|||||
Global warming takes a snow dayJune 3rd, 2005 |
 16 comments to Global warming takes a snow day |
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Definitely one for Nelson Muntz.
I’m in the shipping industry, we’re waiting for the globe to warm up enough to truly open the North-West passage and half shipping times from N W Europe to Japan. Every cloud has a silver lining……
you just can’t make up stuff like this… I’m afraid I’ll never be able to stop laughing!!!
Were they expecting the tropics… already?
Drew attention to Global Warming they did indeed — the fact that its a fraud. Thanks swampies.
Oh good Christ. If you want to have a debate about climate change, there’s lots of good data, but citing this story as any kind of proof of its non-existence is just stupid.
Global “warming” is a really bad name for the phenomenon, since what you’re actually getting is global climate change. In particular, the climate gets more erratic, so that normal weather patterns become shifted.
Now if you want to argue Michael Crichton’s point — that it’s hard to trust models made by people who have a point to prove in advance — great. If you want to say that the math is way too complex to make good predictions, great. But to say that consistently adding a lot of C02 into the air will never have an impact is just foolish, as is saying that a bad snowstorm in June disproves global warming.
The well named badliberal just can’t take a joke.
It’s stuff like this that makes me believe in some sort of cosmic justice—or at least a cosmic sense of humor.
Of course you can’t be sure whether or not pumping lot of CO2 into the air is counteracting some unfavorable climactic trend either. After all, the planet’s climate has changed signifcantly before humans spread across the planet.
Of course you can’t be sure whether or not pumping lot of CO2 into the air is counteracting some unfavorable climactic trend either. After all, the planet’s climate has changed signifcantly in the past before humans spread across the planet and could do any “harm.” We know the planet has been cooler and warmer, but we don’t know which way it currently would be moving in the absence of human activity.
Badliberal, these two yutzes set out to make a cheap propaganda point that would have had exactly as much connection to real science regardless of whether it succeeded or failed.
You will note the post is totally devoid of any discussion of the scientific merits of the tranzi “global warming” (nice how its morphing into “climate change” as the evidence stubbornly refuses to line up, eh?) scheme. I just posted it for yuks, because I enjoy watching useful idiots fall flat on their asses.
I recall an item from a few years back about two animal rights protesters who were agitating for the release of a bunch of caged pigs. Somehow they “sprang” the pigs, which promptly knocked them down and ate them.
We’re coming out of an Ice Age, of course it’s going to get warmer! 😉
I guess it was all the mammoth methane and dinosaur breath that caused all the HUGE fluctuations in climate in the past.
Too bad the little pukes didn’t freeze to death.
The “climate change” money quote is down on the bottom of the article:
He [Dupre] said he believed the weather extremes in the Arctic “are directly related to global warming.”
He’s buried in snow when he was sure it wouldn’t happen and it’s positively directly related to global warming. If that doesn’t smack of a religious worldview, I don’t know what does. It’s irrelevant what the data says. It’s global warming.
It just might be, but then, the Second Coming just might be coming, too.
The “climate change” money quote is down on the bottom of the article:
He [Dupre] said he believed the weather extremes in the Arctic “are directly related to global warming.”
He’s buried in snow when he was sure it wouldn’t happen and it’s positively directly related to global warming. If that doesn’t smack of a religious worldview, I don’t know what does. It’s irrelevant what the data says. It’s global warming.
It just might be, but then, the Second Coming just might be coming, too.
Humor aside, nothing is proven here, except that the Arctic is a hazardous place. More snow could well be consistent with global warming: warmer air holds more moisture, after all, which may mean more snow. At least their propaganda point didn’t cost them their lives!
You will note the post is totally devoid of any discussion of the scientific merits of the tranzi “global warming” (nice how its morphing into “climate change” as the evidence stubbornly refuses to line up, eh?) scheme.
No, people who know what they’re talking about have always referred to it as climate change.