H/T goes out to Marc Morano over at ClimateDepot.com for sending this to me.
Gio-
How’s that Global Warming working out for ya?
Worst Winter in Scotland since 1914? Worst in Ireland since 1962-63? and worst in England and Wales since 1981-82?
Giovanni's World
Politics & Global Warming_Nonsense ~ Fair and Balanced_Sometimes ~ Truth_Always!
Comments
 | beef sandwich near M… on Abortionists Hate God |
 | ラブドール販売 on Republicans vs Democrats |
| The Carbon Sense Coa… on Climate Change = World Go… | |
| Sowing the Seeds of… on Climate Change = World Go… | |
 | Daniel Duffy on Is Obama A Communist? |
 | DEADNIGGERBESTNIGGER… on Obama Plans To End The US… |
 | fuckjews&rothsch… on Obama Plans To End The US… |
| Cheers and Jeers: Ru… on American Solutions I | |
 | Art Z. Fartzche on No Nativity Scene on Private… |
 | Nigerian Independenc… on Sarah Palin A Nazi? |
 | Danny Mac Burge on Constitutional Lawyer Warns Ag… |
| The Left: They'… on Eagles Fly Alone | |
 | Bert Bjorlin on Not My President |
 | Darlene on Sarah Palin A Nazi? |
| Sadahatama Oba Mage on Obama Woos Hu |
Our Next President?
Giovanni's World 
Hey, I’ll be really suprised if someone hasn’t pointed this out to you already but…
Just because the word “warming” is in the term “Global Warming”, doesn’t mean that everywhere in the world, at all times, will experience a warming of the climate due to Global Warming. Here’s why…
The earth’s weather system is chaotic (I mean this in the strict, mathematical sense – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory). This means that Global Warming may in fact sometimes manifest as a pronounced cooling in some areas (unusually harsh winters etc.), and we would actually *expect* this to happen. It is no suprise if some areas experience cooler than normal conditions as a result of Global “Warming”. In short, when the global climate system is screwed with, weird things can and will happen.
It is a gross oversimplification, and misunderstanding of earth’s climate system to say that we should only expect to see warming, everywhere, at all times, across the globe, as a result of Global “Warming”.
Jarrod,
Hey, didn’t you get the email? You know, the one where we all find out that Global Warming/Climate Change is a hoax?!
You need to be de-programmed, the war is over. Your side lost, remember?
Gio-
Oh good, another troll.
First Jarrod- you need to learn to never cite wiki. It’s and unreliable source and if you continue to use it to support your position, you’ll find that you’ll be increasingly dismissed.
Secondly, the issue has never been warming vs. cooling, or the earth’s changing weather patterns. The issue is AGW. The issue was manipulated. The issue was false. The issue is dead.
Wiki….ah, the most trusted name in facts…HAHAHAHHAHA
I wasn’t commenting at all on the anthropogenic nature (or not) of global warming. I was simply addressing the specific, and incorrect implication in this post that the fact that some places have experienced cooler than normal conditions, is evidence against global warming. Nothing more.
Wiki is a reliable enough source of information on uncontentious, unsubjective subjects such as mathematics. Here’s some other info on the topic I’ve found informative, if you dislike wiki:
BBC’s Secret Life of Chaos – this is a fascinating watch in it’s own right, especially the discovery of BZ Reactions!
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Chaos.html
As a final note, it is dissapointing that you would make aggresive assumptions about my actual view on anthropogenic global warming, when I made no comment whatsoever on that subject, and was only interested in pointing out the false implication of this article. AGW is an important topic, which is why it is equally important to keep our minds open, or discourse civil and above all, to be intellectually honest. The false implication of this article, and your dismissal of my point due to your assumptions about my broader opinion, run counter to this.
Keep drinking the Al Gore kool-aid…this planet has survived billions of years and will continue to do so whether or not I drive a stupid “smart car”.
You’re countering with the BBC?
And if you’re referring to my mention of AGW, you’ll see that I didn’t subscribe that to you, I merely mentioned that the controversy is of the anthropogenic aspect of weather variations. Falling into immediate defense mode at the mere mention of the term is quite telling.
I got the impression from “You need to be de-programmed” and “Oh good, another troll”, and the general tone of these posts, that there were assumptions being made about my stance on AGW and that my point was being dismissed as a result. Most people would probably get that impression from those comments, in the context of this blog.
What is telling is that no-one has actually responded in any meaninful manner to the *specific* point I have made. My opinion on the broader topic of AGW is completely irrelevant. The validity of an opinion exists independantly of the makeup of the person voicing that opinion.
Hey GB, where you been hiding?
Gio-
One specific point you made: “In short, when the global climate system is screwed with, weird things can and will happen.”
So all the weird things that happened before man started screwing with the global climate system was due to what? The weather fairy?
From my reply above: Secondly, the issue has never been warming vs. cooling, or the earth’s changing weather patterns.
I think that acknowledges the specific point of chaotic weather patterns.
But, as long as you’re still hanging with us…
Paraphrasing your initial comment: ‘just because it’s cold here, doesn’t mean it’s not warm somewhere else’ is meant to do, what, exactly? The lede didn’t specifically indicate otherwise, and neither did the link. However, is there anyone arguing that Global Warming is a natural occurring condition that fluctuates into Cooling at varying times due to anomalies such as El Niño or La Niña? And doesn’t the term “Global” indicate — well— global?
I think it’s a reasonable reaction to surmise that your comment places you squarely in the AGW crowd, or you wouldn’t have felt the need to address this thread in defense of temperature data. And if my assumption is correct, than you’ve got a tough task in convincing any of us that a massive transfer of wealth will somehow reverse the earth’s “chaotic” weather patterns.
If, however, you understand as most of us here at Gio’s World that AGW is a hoax and I misread the intention of your post, than I retract the troll reference.
Look at the raw, unadulterated record for a single, well-sited, rural weather station at Dale Enterprise Virginia. It has been in continuous operation since 1890. It shows a temperature increase of about 0.24 degC / century. That seems to be a reasonable record for the recovery from the Little Ice Age.
Then compare the raw data from Rural stations before and after “adjustment by the US climate professionals” and you find that they have over the period since 1960 by an additional 0.47 degC.
Add to that that the climate professionals have chosen to ignore many sites still providing acceptable data from Canada and Siberia and then to calculate their version of “global temperature” by extrapolating information into the areas where they are ignoring real data sets and concatenating that fabricated data to announce the warmest year ever. And they have been doing this progressively for many years.
This applies not only to the US official sources but also in numerous examples from New Zealand, Australia, UK etc.
After all that one has to smell a rat, especially as the data sources are controlled by Dr Hansen of NASA GISS who has been grinding a political axe for the last 20+ years.
In order to change the way the world works there is a crying need for real and independent DUE DILIGENCE at least to examine if any of these claims might have a grain of truth. And to reject the data if it is proven to be biased or in any way fabricated.
And frankly I would like to see some proof that a really warmer world is the catastrophe that the Warmists declare. A warmer world would feed more people and at present crops are failing and food prices are escalating because of adverse colder weather.
repeat because of typo : apologies
Look at the raw, unadulterated record for a single, well-sited, rural weather station at Dale Enterprise Virginia. It has been in continuous operation since 1890. It shows a temperature increase of about 0.24 degC / century. That seems to be a reasonable record for the recovery from the Little Ice Age.
Then compare the raw data from Rural stations before and after “adjustment by the US climate professionals” and you find that they have increased over the period since 1960 by an additional 0.47 degC.
Add to that that the climate professionals have chosen to ignore many sites still providing acceptable data from Canada and Siberia and then to calculate their version of “global temperature” by extrapolating information into the areas where they are ignoring real data sets and concatenating that fabricated data to announce the warmest year ever. And they have been doing this progressively for many years.
This applies not only to the US official sources but also in numerous examples from New Zealand, Australia, UK etc.
After all that one has to smell a rat, especially as the data sources are controlled by Dr Hansen of NASA GISS who has been grinding a political axe for the last 20+ years.
In order to change the way the world works there is a crying need for real and independent DUE DILIGENCE at least to examine if any of these claims might have a grain of truth. And to reject the data if it is proven to be biased and in any way fabricated.
And frankly I would like to see some proof that a really warmer world is the catastrophe that the Warmists declare. A warmer world would feed more people and at present crops are failing and food prices are escalating because of adverse colder weather.
To Ed
Have the data been recalculated because of the warming effect of the electronic transmission equipment inside the weather station. Also how much has the urban heat effects been at that station? The climate has always been changing, AGW is not even close to a fact.
Still no response to original point I made. Telling indeed. I’ll take the silence as your begrudging acknowledgement that the OP was indeed a misleading and ridiculous implication.