Climate miscellaney, and saying it isn’t a problem always solves the problem. Right?

Here in my region we’re heading into a third year of serious drought. Last year’s rainfall was 16 inches below normal. Scary, but not as scary as the fact that in just the first three months of this year, we’re already seven inches behind.

Via a trackback to Whatever Works, I discovered Greenfrye‘s blog (here).  It’s a frackin’ good resource for climate information with lots of handy links and includes a “Climate Denial Crock of the Week” feature, an amusing (at first) but ultimately maddening read that also features dozens of delicious videos. (He’s frequently wonky, but there’s plenty there for we mere mortals.)

A few minutes later, I came across this story at the famous lefty rag Scientific American:

LONDON (Reuters) – The world is close to reaching tipping points that will make it irreversibly hotter, making this decade critical in efforts to contain global warming, scientists warned on Monday.

A recent panel (lost link, sorry) of environmentalists said that Al Gore’s movie hurt because it energized the deniers and recast global warming as a political issue instead of a scientific human issue. That rings true; Gore’s traditional opponents – like those chicken hawks who mocked his Vietnam service by saying he wasn’t, you know, in battle carrying a gun so it didn’t count. At least not like it counted sitting on the sidelines taking pot shots at those who did go into battle and came home wiser and with less enthusiasm for sending their younger brothers off to become the next batch of dead soldiers – piled on.

This planet of ours has a problem, but not to worry –  I’ll close my eyes, click my heels, and make it all go away. Easy.

8 responses to “Climate miscellaney, and saying it isn’t a problem always solves the problem. Right?

  1. Ms. Holland ,
    Are you saying that your latest drought is the result of man made global warming ?


    • No I’m not Alan. Nor is any serious environmentalist blaming any discrete weather condition anywhere in the world on climate change. ‘Global warming’ is about planetary temperature, carbon ppm in the atmosphere and altered, interrupted weather patterns. A lot of what happens fits into that scenario but no single weather event can be proved to be a result.What can be proved though is melting ice, disappearing glaciers, ocean temperatures rising, jet stream moving . . .


  2. Let me guess, you live somewhere dry anyway. If you lived in a rainforest, I’d say you have something unusual going on, but I’ll bet you live in a place like Nevada or Texas where half the state has an arid and semi-arid climate. Getting a drought in an arid region is about as unexpected as getting snow in the Arctic. But since you have not revealed where you live, I have to assume that a drought is unusual. If the drought lasts for years and years, then it is considered a changed climate and will become permanent. If it is not permanent, then the climate has not changed. Its then just a dry spell.

    I have dropped Scientific American as my home science reading. They continually harp about anthropogenic climate change too much, there are other topics which they can write about, but it got so bad I had to let the subscripotion expire. I don’t want to pay for it.

    And did you notice the above news service is Reuters? Reuters is the most left leaning and pro climate change news service in the world. It is owned by the Thompson Group out of Toronto, they are big in green tech investments, hence the green bias of Reuters. Its gross.


    • klem, any reader of this blog knows pretty much exactly where I live – I live in Florida, which I’ve talked about a number of times. Florida is not a dry state. My area is supposed to get 56 inches of rain annually. Last year we got 40.

      See my reply to Alan above – I’ve no idea if our drought is a ‘result’ of warming. But it does bring it to mind.

      So you dropped Sci American because you disagree with what they say? A journal dedicated to science, written mostly by scientists? I’m guessing they always ‘harp’ on stories of significance to scientists.

      You indict Reuters and Thompson for being big in ‘green tech investments’? Investment is what they’re about. That and M&A of course . . . I guess these acquisitions mean they’re all about the One Percent? So confusing. . .

      In October 2010, Thomson Reuters acquired Serengeti Law, a matter management and ebilling system.

      In November 2010, Thomson Reuters acquired the legal process outsourcing (LPO) provider Pangea3. Pangea3 serves corporate legal departments and law firms worldwide. Financial Terms of the deal were not disclosed.[35]

      In November 2010, Thomson Reuters acquired the banking data and analytic provider, Highline Financial.

      In November 2010, Thomson Reuters acquired GeneGo, the leading supplier of systems biology databases, software and services.[36]

      In December 2011, Thomson Reuters acquired Emochila, a leading website development firm in the tax and accounting space, in order to further integrate its CS suite of products onto a cloud-based platform.[37]

      In January 2012, Thomson Reuters acquired Dr Tax, Canada’s largest independently owned developer of income tax software for accounting firms and consumers.[38] [39]

      In February 2012, Thomson Reuters acquired RedEgg, a leading provider of media intelligence solutions for public relations and marketing professionals. [40]

      For myself, re climate change, I take cues from places like NASA, the Pentagon, NOAA, the World Bank – you know, the institutions who are making plans for what they know to be inevitable.

      Happy denying . . .


  3. Ms. Holland ,

    Thank you for the answer . The fact that you included your drought in the preamble to your posting on Man Made Global Warming made me think that you might be hinting at a link between the two . I’m glad you have disabused me of my mistake .


    • Don’t put wordds in my mouth Alan – I was in fact hinting at a link. But no one can say for sure, so I don’t claim it – but I certainly don’t deny the possiblitiy.


  4. ” Don’t put words in my mouth. ”
    Qui, moi ? Je ne ferais jamais .


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s