California gets a taste of global warming

Temperatures throughout the state fell by as much as 20 degrees Fahrenheit (11 degrees Celsius) below normal, allowing snow to accumulate at elevations as low as 1,500 feet, the National Weather Service reported.

Although no further snow was expected to fall over the weekend, temperatures were expected to continue to drop on Saturday before gradually warming into next week, the weather service said.

About 4 inches of snow fell on Thursday on a winding stretch of the Interstate 5 known as the Grapevine, which passes through mountains between Los Angeles and Bakersfield, prompting authorities to shut down the north-south artery for 17 hours beginning Thursday afternoon.

California cold snap threatens citrus crop, strands motorists | Reuters

Remember folks all things are global warming or caused by it./sarcasm

Climate change. Good lord, it’s climate change!!! Just like snow fell in Israel and Jordan!! Climate. Change.

It’s cold somewhere. Global warming is wrong!

2012 was the hottest United States year on record. You can’t really point to snow somewhere and claim that warming is wrong if simultaneously the average temperature was the highest on record.

You should bring up concerns in the other thread.

[quote=“Trekky0623, post:3, topic:37796”]
It’s cold somewhere. Global warming is wrong!

2012 was the hottest United States year on record. You can’t really point to snow somewhere and claim that warming is wrong if simultaneously the average temperature was the highest on record.

You should bring up concerns in the other thread.
[/quote]Oh good the history professor, my socks are older than you.

1 Like

Okay. Explain why snowing in California proves global warming wrong, and we’ll move on from there. Until then, it’s pointless, especially when 2012 was the hottest year on record, and when there is a trend of warming.

I saw weather like this back in the 80’s but what do I know I actually experienced it not like the “history professor”.

1 Like

And anecdotes don’t prove anything. A person living in Antarctica in the 80’s would experience very cold weather, but if you take the global average temperature over the years, there is a warming trend.

Or, I’m sorry, are you a climatologist and you have global temperature records from the '80s? Moreover, do you have ANY temperature data from the '80s, or are you just basing your conclusions on how sunny you remember it 30 years ago?

1 Like

Of course there is “Climate Change”, the climate has been dynamic for the entire history of the earth according to everything we have ever observed or gleaned from legitimate research, it has never been static and never will be.

Water is also “wet” but rainfall varies.
Wind increases and decreases in strength also.

The idiocy is when religious freaks who cannot observe even .00001 percent of the earths history claim that the actions of man as he survives are controlling the climate.

This ridiculous, barbaric idea that man possesses godlike power over the weather is not new, idiots like Pharaohs and kings in ancient times also convinced themselves and others that they were a greater power than the environment they lived in, this was the motivation behind blood sacrifices of virgins and eradicating a nations wealth by burying it with these “gods” so they would be wealthy in their next realm.

In more recent times “Rainmakers” bilked the desperate and stupid into believing that they could make it rain during a drought in the dust bowl if their price was met.

Idiot “witches” today think they can manipulate reality by mixing potions and casting spells.

Other idiots scream and cry over rotting wood in the forest (this is a funny video to watch) while cheering the slaughter of innocent babies by the millions.

Nothing is new under the sun, the godless grow increasingly stupid and obtuse until they destroy themselves and the societies that are dumb enough to treat them as credible, the final stage is always a ludicrous new religion that they invent to worship.

2 Likes

Ok so there is a warming trend. Does this mean this is global warming (in the sense of the word by common definition)? I mean, in the 700s vikings colonized greenland. the name isnt a joke, it was actually green. it was warmer than. and the little ice age? both natural changes in weather patterns. if it is warming, is it not possible that this change is NATURAL?

Erm, no, Greenland was not green in the times of Vikings.

Is there a correlation and relationship between greenhouse gas concentrations and global temperature?

[quote=“RET423, post:8, topic:37796”]
Of course there is “Climate Change”, the climate has been dynamic for the entire history of the earth according to everything we have ever observed or gleaned from legitimate research, it has never been static and never will be.

Water is also “wet” but rainfall varies.
Wind increases and decreases in strength also.

The idiocy is when religious freaks who cannot observe even .00001 percent of the earths history claim that the actions of man as he survives are controlling the climate.

This ridiculous, barbaric idea that man possesses godlike power over the weather is not new, idiots like Pharaohs and kings in ancient times also convinced themselves and others that they were a greater power than the environment they lived in, this was the motivation behind blood sacrifices of virgins and eradicating a nations wealth by burying it with these “gods” so they would be wealthy in their next realm.

In more recent times “Rainmakers” bilked the desperate and stupid into believing that they could make it rain during a drought in the dust bowl if their price was met.

Idiot “witches” today think they can manipulate reality by mixing potions and casting spells.

Other idiots scream and cry over rotting wood in the forest (this is a funny video to watch) while cheering the slaughter of innocent babies by the millions.

Nothing is new under the sun, the godless grow increasingly stupid and obtuse until they destroy themselves and the societies that are dumb enough to treat them as credible, the final stage is always a ludicrous new religion that they invent to worship.
[/quote]Well said and will be ignored by trekky as he always does and then he will show us with his divine guidance where we went wrong because experience is less valuable than his assertions of reality. Frankly I believe he is trolling and thinking he putting one over on everyone. I can see him and the other teenagers on their forums talking about how we old people just do not “get it”. All I can say is being there done that, most adolescents think they are smarter than their parents till they grow up and then find out differently and their children start doing the same to them. Kids look at what thy have and think how stupid the adults were who did not have it as kids but never seem to connect the dots that it was the adu,ts who saw a need and created things. They look at a history book written by someone who was not there and depending on the biases wrote what they think was reality which may or may no coincide with actual events. They get inundated with some book that a teacher is pushing which really is an opinion piece rather than a true reflection of events. With the advent of the internet anything can be found to support a position even if it is so far fetched that reality is completely lost. Before the internet people were inurned some what from crackpot ideas. Now we got crackpot professors pushing the shooting of children was made up, steel does not melt, and so on.

Of course it’s

Climate. Change.

After all the conferences on

Global. Warming.

Kept getting frozen out, and that guy in Alaska kept doing the ice sculptures of Al Gore…

Yeah. Because they couldn’t prove global warming after all. So they changed the name. Climates are constantly changing. But puny man doesn’t effect it noticeably. And they keep telling us it’s our fault.

As long as Warmistas cite specific storms and particular years’ winters or summers that are warmer than average as “evidence” of Global Warming, they make themselves vulnerable to contradictory “evidence” in the form of weather phenomena and seasons that are cooler than average.

Climate is an average phenomenon, and average of decades, centuries and millennia. One of the facts that is fatal to Global-Warmism, IMO, is that: 1. a.) humans have not been able to measure temperature directly for more than 3 or 4 centuries; 1. b.) humans have not had instrument-grade (by modern standards) temperature measurement capability with .1 degree or better resolution for more than a century or two, if that long; 1. c.) humans have not had instrument-grade temperature measurement stations in many huge portions of the globe for as long as a century; 1. d.) proxies such as tree rings are low resolution estimates based on effects that combine more phenomena than just temperature.

That’s a very long way of saying that we do not have a tenth of the data necessary to support Warmistas’ claims (the wilder ones or even the basic ones). The data we do have are more indicative of climate cycles that have been ongoing for far more centuries and millennia than mankind has had significant industrial capability. The data we do have also indicate that the past 2 or 3 decades of supposed warming are still less warm than in Medieval and possibly Roman times.

1 Like

[quote=“Fantasy_Chaser, post:13, topic:37796”]
Of course it’s

Climate. Change.

After all the conferences on

Global. Warming.

Kept getting frozen out, and that guy in Alaska kept doing the ice sculptures of Al Gore…
[/quote]Wasn’t it not that long ago snow fell in Bagdad? A place they said had not seen snow for 100 years

AFP: First snow for 100 years falls on Baghdad

You see the problem here? The basis of global warming is based on thousands of years of CO[sub]2[/sub] data and temperature data, and there is a correlation between the two. It leads to the conclusion that artificially raising the natural CO[sub]2[/sub] level will also artificially raise the temperature, and that’s what has happened.

[quote=“Trekky0623, post:17, topic:37796”]
You see the problem here? The basis of global warming is based on thousands of years of CO[sub]2[/sub] data and temperature data, and there is a correlation between the two. It leads to the conclusion that artificially raising the natural CO[sub]2[/sub] level will also artificially raise the temperature, and that’s what has happened.
[/quote]more nonsense-- prove it

What more is there to prove? We know that certain gases like CO[sub]2[/sub] called greenhouse gases are capable of trapping heat. There’s evidence of this from hundreds of thousands of years of temperature and CO[sub]2[/sub] gas concentration data from ice cores in both Antarctica and Greenland, as well as a couple other locations around the globe. Data from different locations on the globe agrees with each other, and despite what some have claimed, average CO[sub]2[/sub] concentrations do not lag average temperature. The CO[sub]2[/sub] concentration is 40% higher than it has ever been, mostly starting when humans started to release these gases through artificial means. We can even calculate how much we’re responsible for by subtracting natural causes of CO[SUB]2[/sub] and warming, like volcanoes and solar activity, and it is significant. It would seem that if you increase these gases artificially, the temperature will also rise artificially. And that is what has happened, with temperatures rising at a much faster rate than natural. No climatologist disputes these claims, not even the ones on your “650” list, as I have shown. What more is there to prove? Do you have a rebuttal?

Um yes it was. At least the southern tip was. Otherwise, the three viking colonies that were set up there never would have survived. They lasted roughtly from 900 to around 1400, the last record being a marriage. It was warmer and capable of agriculture. Not so much any more.