Daily Kos

The Decider Vs. The Enabler

Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:12:17 AM PDT

If big business and President Bush are getting religion on human induced climate change, it hasn't yet filtered down to the cadres of mis-informationists the administration is alleged to have enabled over the last six years:

Realclimate -- In an odd repeat of last year, we find ourselves well into the meteorological Northern Hemisphere winter (Dec-Feb) with little evidence over large parts of the country (most noteably the eastern and central U.S.) that it ever really began. Unsurprisingly, numerous news stories have popped up asking whether global warming might be to blame. Almost as if on cue, representatives from NOAA's National Weather Service have been dispatched to tell us that the event e.g. "has absolutely nothing to do with global warming", but instead is entirely due to the impact of the current El Nino event.

Case in point, Dennis Feltgen speaking on behalf of NOAA stating on national media:

"We're in an El Niño, which has absolutely nothing to do with global warming," Feltgen says. "It keeps a lot of the cold air locked up in Canada, and makes the West Coast of the United States stormy, which we've seen, and makes the southern one-third of the country wetter than normal."

Drink in that subtle implication: An empirically determined, global coupled ocean-atmosphere phenomenon is unrelated to a global warming trend, both occuring in the same interconnected, chaotic system ... ? It's almost like saying the destruction of Katrina was entirely due to a hurricane -- then adding it therefore had absolutely nothing to do with warmer sea surface temperatures.

Global warming implies, unsurprisingly, more energy in the air and water, which might produce larger, wetter storms. In summer, sure enough, that could potentially translate into more powerful hurricanes. But during wintertime, it might produce large, moist cold fronts which travel farther and last longer than they otherwise would have. Ergo, global warming could play a role in a hypothetical freak snowstorm in Florida -- or in very real massive blizzards in Colorado.

But just as a one lucky poker hand cannot be blamed on a stacked deck, a single storm, a single month, or even one anomalous hot or cold season, cannot be blamed definitively on a single cause, be it climate change or El Nino. Anyone who has taken climatology 101 knows that. One would assume that Mr. Feltgen is aware of it as well.

  • ::

Tags: climate change, global warming, noaa, ipcc (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 209 comments

  •  FYI (25+ / 0-)

    In case anyone is wondering, NOAA has declared that 2006 was the warmest year in  US since records have been kept, starting in 1895.

    Read UTI, your free thought forum

    by DarkSyde on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:12:10 AM PDT

    •  In Europe (7+ / 0-)

      It's apparently the warmest winter in 1,300 years. As records don't go back that far, I'm reckoning that this has been determined by studies of tree rings.

      Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

      by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:31:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I (8+ / 0-)

        know some folks who can't wait to see fraudsters like Feltgen under oath. For climate scientists, it'll be better than the Gonzales tap dancing and Constitution stomp special we were privy to last week.

        Read UTI, your free thought forum

        by DarkSyde on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:33:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  In Canada there's been so much change (12+ / 0-)

          the denialists have basically given up, and have gone over to "we can't afford to change anything because we'll freeze to death if we follow Kyoto." (no, not joking, heard that argument seriously promoted by someone.)

          Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

          by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:36:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The most egregious aspect (18+ / 0-)

            of the current NOAA denialist campaign is contained in the quote

            "(El Nino) keeps a lot of the cold air locked up in Canada."

            I saw and heard this said myself on the NBC Nightly News, and nearly fell off my chair. I live in eastern Canada and that very week, our own news was filled with practically nothing but freakishly warm weather reports and the obdurate absence of snow everywhere. I even sent an e-mail to NBC suggesting they might want to pick up the phone and call Canada before broadcasting such laughable untruths.

            •  laughable untruths (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              MTgirl, Naniboujou

              the mainstream media is like a cowering enabling spouse allowing corporations/government to beat the common people of the world into some sort of unrecognizable form

              global warming is just an inconvenient product of incredibly wealthy assholes driving the world at 100 mph because they can  

              "The best way to determine what a person wants is by surveying what he gets." -Erle Stanley Gardner

              by KOTCrum on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:21:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  There is no NOAA denialist campaign (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Ed in Montana

              I am pretty much sure of it.  I think Dennis' statement about the cold air is basically a misnomer.  Canada has been much warmer than average as well (typical for El Nino years).  However places like Alaska have not.  Maybe it is more accurate to say that the cold air has been stuck around the poles.  

              •  Have you a link? (2+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                MTgirl, Sigrid of Horg

                This would be interesting to look at. Just to see where the cold air really is being held. There are probably lots of maps over at NOAA that could be looked at.

                As DarkSyde suggested, we'll just have to wait for these folks to called in front of a Congressional Committee and put under oath. That should prove to be high entertainment.

                Common Sense is not Common

                by RustyBrown on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:40:07 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  I know many in Alaska who would disagee n/t (0+ / 0-)

              •  Alaska shows us climatic chaos (0+ / 0-)

                Although the overall picture of the earth makes it clear that global warming is occurring, we would be much better off talking about climatic chaos, because the local impact is so variable.  Here in Juneau, Alaska we have had over 110 inches of snow so far this season, more than double the average.  We set or came close to setting cold weather records for a couple of months last year, but all of this is probably directly or indirectly linked to global warming.

                Both because the concept of warming carries some good "warm" fuzzy implications and because the local experience of global warming is not always "warmer", we would do better with the phrase climatic chaos.  After watching everything from hurricanes, to tsunamis, to cherry blossoms on the east coast in January, people would find it hard to argue with this concept.

                Maybe if mothers (and men with a mother's heart) ran the world, we would stop killing so many people.

                by chichagof on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 10:04:31 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Boreal permafrost is melting... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...pretty much pan-globally.  Including Canada.  And the arctic ice season has been getting shorter and shorter pretty much every year.  This the dire straits of the polar bear.

                  John McCain voted against health care for kids.

                  by Land of Enchantment on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 12:06:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I've been using climate change (0+ / 0-)

                  and climate crisis.  But climate chaos is a good one and I may steal it.

                  I've had several denialists already saying "it's cold here; we can't be having global warming", so something has to be done to educate them that one cold winter day where they happen to live does not mean the planet is saved :)

      •  there are lots of temperature surrogates... (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        sodalis, Bronx59

        lake varves (yearly layers of sediments), glacial ice cores (and the ratio of isotopes of gases like O2), the tree rings you mentioned, weather diaries that might mention timing of ice breakup and formation on rivers and lakes, and so on.  The study sounds pretty extensive:

        Reinhard Boehm, a climatologist at Austria's Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics based his findings on an extensive climate study that he conducted with a group of European institutes between March 2003 and August 2006.

         

        This from Sci-Tech Today.  I googled some key words, and got LOTS of references.

        Political compass: -5.50 econ, -5.79 libertarian/authoritarian

        by billlaurelMD on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:40:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Temperature surrogates are . . (0+ / 0-)

          very spotty in their precision.  

          Their points in time are all approximates.  

          Their locations are not necessarily good predictors of what else was going on around the globe at the time.  

          Their interpretations are an art as much as a science; for example most any two ice cores will be read differently by any two different scientists.

          There simply are not enough of them for any decade or century.

          All those imprecisions grow exponentially as we go back in time.

          Graphs of past centuries and millenia are normally shown with a single line representing the derived averages, but the +/- on each data point used in that line grows and grows and grows as we go further back in time.  The single line leads us to think we know things with precision, but in reality that line should be a fuzz that gets fuzzier as it goes back in time.

      •  Day 39 (0+ / 0-)

        I wonder how many days it took for them to stop saying, "A single day and night of rain proves nothing, weather naturally fluctuates and you can't prove anything with anecdotes."  Maybe on day 39 a few global-raining skeptics were like, "hm, maybe there is a bit of a pattern here.  Perhaps we should-- glug."

    •  To NBC's credit (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Philoguy

      Brian Williams had people on from Real Climate on the Monday following the Friday NOAA "El Nino" story correcting the record that the strong El Nino was probably caused by global warming.

      I have rarely seen a member of the MSM do an about face that quickly on a major story.

      Who will stop this war of lies? Keith Olbermann May 23rd, 2007

      by Ed in Montana on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 07:58:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Cunctator had a nice (0+ / 0-)

      little discussion of Feltgen Global warming? Don't ask a weatherman (WaPo edition), which had some nice comments.

      As for meteorologists, there is an interesting discussion in Hell and High Water by Joe Romm (Recommended reading).

      Another reason the media gets the climate extreme-weather link wrong:  Most meteorologists, including virtually every TV meteorologist, are not experts on global warming.  As on climate scientist explained to me:

      "Meteorologits are not required to take a course in climate change ... university programs don't requre the course (even if they offer it).  So we have been educating generations of meteorologists who know nothing about climate change."

      Asking a meteorologist to explain the cause of recent extreme weather is like asking your family doctor what the chances are for an avian flu pandemic in the next few years or asking a Midwest sheriff about the prospects of nuclear terrorism. The answer might be interesting, but it wouldn't be one I'd stake my family's life on. (p. 225)

      Yet, meteorologists are the easiest for journalists to get ahold of and they sound so authoritative.

      Finally, diaries regularly on the recommended list (such as mine yesterday:  
      WashPost published my LTE re Global Warming Skeptics) and regular front page discussions.  Is Global Warming mainstream here at Daily Kos?

      Is it time to move back to the question of what we -- as progressives -- should be working for?  Is it time to be seriously figuring out what the Democratic Party should be working on in terms of energy/environment?  To be looking at and pressuring candidates?  Should Global Warming (and sustainable energy) be the centerpiece of the Congress and the 2008 election?

      And, isn't it about time that we got on with Energizing America?

    •  Has anyone argued... (0+ / 0-)

      ...that global warming would eliminate El Niño events?  Hardly.  Have climate scientists suggested that global warming might well cause the oscillations of El Niño to be greater?  The pendulum to swing farther with each beat?  For the events to be more extreme in both directions?  Yessiree.

      I love the cold and snow we're having here in New Mexico this winter.  But I've not forgotten that last winter was the driest on record in the state.  And damned warm, too...  Our first few months of 2006 contributed to it being the warmest year on record even if it's been colder and much wetter this winter.

      What a load of un-logical BS!!

      (Perhaps these trends could contribute to the genesis a freak snowstorm in Malibu as well as in Florida, eh?)

      John McCain voted against health care for kids.

      by Land of Enchantment on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 12:04:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Has anyone made a forecast (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    DarkSyde

    on how much of the Greenland Ice Sheet is going to slip into the ocean in, say, the next 10 years. I know that current models don't explain the more-rapid-than forecast rate of melting, but I thought that perhaps someone had done some sort of estimate based on historical performance.

    Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

    by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:35:29 AM PDT

    •  It's (10+ / 0-)

      kind of a dicey calculation. In the words of ice climbers "Ice is alive," meaning it's unpredictably dependant on factors that cannot be readily observed or easily measured because those locations are buried, intermittent, and all tangled up with varying kinds of snow, firn, and ice beholden to the water-ice phase differential.

      Slippery When Wet -- it appears that the layer of melt-water between land and ice has become enlarged and warmer, thus acting as a better lubricant for the outlet glaciers to slide along in their journey to the sea. As the ice moves faster and faster, structural weakness will bloom into rifts, rifts join up and expand becoming deep crevasses, crevasses widen into gullies. The process could eventually turn the slow moving outlet glaciers into ice choked rivers, at which point these natural, glacial dams would effectively collapse.

      A straight out thermal calculation yields answers in the centuries to millenia range, but work in slippage and shear, it could be decades. Or it might all tumble down in the next five years.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:42:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Time to visit the Maldives (5+ / 0-)

        and south Florida and Bangladesh and Nauru and....

        Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

        by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:45:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Btw, have you got a link (0+ / 0-)

        to the original scientific paper? I've read the NY Times, Guardian, etc. on the lubrication and pooling issue, but haven't seen the source material.

        Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

        by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:47:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I moved the lawn in December ... (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Ed in Montana, MTgirl

          My house is close to the Arctic. The grass usually stops growing in October. This year I mowed it in December.

          A freak occurrence. Maybe?
          Should we gamble on that? Have they stopped to ask themselves why El Niño is so active? Or why the North Atlantic is warmer than it has ever been?

          Fools, on a fool's errand.

          "I don't do quagmires, and my boss doesn't do nuance."

          by SteinL on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:02:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Okay, but have you got the link I wanted? nt (0+ / 0-)

            Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

            by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:08:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Chapter 6 is particularly interesting (0+ / 0-)

              The earlier review of Arctic climate is good for background.

              http://www.acia.uaf.edu/...

              "I don't do quagmires, and my boss doesn't do nuance."

              by SteinL on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:53:09 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Which chapter is about the pooling effect (0+ / 0-)

                under Greenland glaciers?

                Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

                by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:14:43 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Then you want this Nature paper (0+ / 0-)

                  If you're a subscriber, you can download it directly; if not, you can purchase it.

                  Deals with subglacial freshwater lakes and rivers - particularly Lake Vostok.

                  http://www.nature.com/...

                  "I don't do quagmires, and my boss doesn't do nuance."

                  by SteinL on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:18:23 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  My bad - you need a site license to see the paper (0+ / 0-)

                    Make a search on:

                    Physical, chemical and biological processes in Lake Vostok ...

                    http://www.google.com/...

                    You'll pick up various links.

                    "I don't do quagmires, and my boss doesn't do nuance."

                    by SteinL on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:24:16 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Thanks for both links (0+ / 0-)

                    not sure if they're the thing I was after about Greenland...but the first item at least is very interesting.

                    Btw, I think there should be a periodical on climate for the educated layman. The scientific journals on the subject are full of technical jargon and are so a little over my head.

                    Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

                    by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:25:53 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  try this.... (0+ / 0-)

                      on Real Climate, which includes some links to articles.

                      Political compass: -5.50 econ, -5.79 libertarian/authoritarian

                      by billlaurelMD on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:57:18 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  That article is inconclusive (0+ / 0-)

                        One of the studies cited says this:

                        This means that the Greenland ice has an overall mass gain by +11 ± 3 Gt/year (=10 ± 2.7 km3/year)

                        Note that if this is accurate and is sustained over any length of time, then Greenland is taking water out of circulation, which over time would LOWER sea levels.

                        Most of the statements made or referred to are severely qualified.

                        The period of study is only 11 years, so it is only a snapshot of one very small window of time.  Frawing conclusions based on such a small sampling is frighteningly unscientific.

                        The overall impression of the article seems to be that the overall view is muddled and inconclusive.

                        It seems, based on this (and it is not the first I have seen that is inconclusive), they have a very, very long way to go to understanding the Greenland ice.

                    •  The subglacial lakes are not on Greenland, though (0+ / 0-)

                      That's in the Antarctic, and the overview through the google link is based upon the title from the paper that was published in Nature.

                      "I don't do quagmires, and my boss doesn't do nuance."

                      by SteinL on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:57:00 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  Boy, did you have me confused! (3+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            newfie, creeper

            I had never heard of someone doing this before...

            I moved the lawn in December

            Why the heck would someone move their lawn and what relevance does that have to do with the global warming discussion???? LOL!

            God, I miss Paul Wellstone.

            by Naniboujou on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:36:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Yes - always go to the source material (0+ / 0-)

          The stuff put out to the public is not reliable.  People have agendas - news people (circulation), scientists (funding), politicians (re-election), neocons (hegemony), tree huggers (a return to pre-technological societies).  Always question their motives, and go straight to the data.

          Too many people form their opinions based on absolute trust in the truth of articles they read.  And there are people who will take advantage of that trust, if there is something to be gained.

          We have to be skeptical.  Of all of them.

  •  El Nino (5+ / 0-)

    It would have been supremely helpful if, when Feltgen was queried and then responded that El Nino had nothing to do with global warming, he had simultaneously and emphatically stated that nonetheless global warming was responsible for x & y. It always helps if the experts have a little courage.

    "The truth waits for eyes unclouded by longing." The Tao Te Ching

    by hester on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 03:35:45 AM PDT

    •  el nino (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      hester, BuckMulligan

      I would swear that when I lived in Utah in the early '90s, they said the reason we weren't getting any snow was because of el Nino.  Apparently every screwed up thing in our climate is because of el Nino -- it's like republican blowhards blaming every bad thing on liberals.

      •  Yes, they do that, don't they? (0+ / 0-)

        DO continue to be skeptical.

        If they don't blame it on El Niño, they blame it on global warming.

        Some of the same scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute who were saying in the 1970s that we were headed into a new ice age were some of the first ones touting global warming.  IMHO, they go where the funding is.

        There is a larger cycle in the Pacific - the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), that was discovered, not by climatologists, but by a biologist studying salmon catches in the Northern Pacific.  It has been confirmed as a real phenomenon, but not much work has been done on it yet.  It seems to be about ten times more powerful than El Niño, and operates on a much longer period.

        In time, when the PDO becomes sexy, they will blame everything on the PDO.  And in another 10-20 years after that, they will blame everything on some new phenomenon.

        The bottom line?  They don't really know.  They're trying, but they don't have enough info yet.  Not for a long time.

  •  Cold air locked up in Canada? (11+ / 0-)

    Tell that lie to THIS Canadian, Feltgen, you ass-kissing moron, who had the first ever green Christmas since she moved 2 1/2 hours north of Toronto.

    Ontario's biggest ski area laid off 1200 people.  My local tubing park lost $70,000 over the Christmas holiday -- did their traditional New Year's Eve bash in pouring rain.  It was mid-January before winter started.

    Was this just in Ontario?  NO -- I got it straight from Canadian "weather guru" David Phillips, for an article I was writing: warmest December ever across the whole country.

    We already know what's happening in Europe.

    Thanks a lot, you dead-ender asshole, for doing your bit to help the species get that much closer to the point of no hope.

    •  On the plus side (0+ / 0-)

      Ski resorts closed means fewer people driving 60 miles in their SUVs for their ski vacation.

      January 20. 2009 cannot come soon enough.

      by Crisis Corps Volunteer on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:12:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Golf on brown grass in New Hampshire? (3+ / 0-)

        In Northern New Hampshire our tourist economy depends on four distinct seasons with the winter season dependent on snowcover.  Over the past 30 years our Dec-Feb average temperatures have increased 4.4 degrees.  We have 20 fewer days of snowcover.  Beyond skiing and snowmobiling, we have a forest products industry which hasn't been able to drive skidders and logging trucks into the woods because the ground hasn't been frozen and would be torn to shreds. Shallow ponds where we used to skate on Thanksgiving now have open water at Christmas.

        It was suggested that we drop our four seasons and go with two: a nine month golf on green grass season and a 3 month golf on brown grass season.  That may be funny if all you have to worry about is your handicap.

        It is my understanding that El Nino has a 4-5 year cysle and has some unpredictability to it but perhaps only impacts temperature 1.7 degrees and may exacerbate extreme weather events but in no way is responsible for the underlying trends.

        Democracy isn't something you have, it's something you do! "Granny D"

        by chuck in NH on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:46:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I Don't Believe Bush's Latest (8+ / 0-)

    Embrace of climate change policy one bit. I believe its a charade to lessen the impact this issue is going to have in the 08' election. His advisors are letting him know that this is not good for the Republicans.

    If only he'd wake up and realize this is much bigger than an election and way more important than politics.

    Life looks aflame from afar; but close up it's just fireflies in a jar. Visit me daily at artofstarving

    by artofstarving on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:01:39 AM PDT

  •  2 things: (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    rapala
    1. I stay out of global warming discussions for many reasons, the main of which I think there are so many more accessible avenues to show that humans have to take better care of the environment.
    1. I mentioned this earlier this week but more and more I have been hearing about stories about how the American model destroys ecologies. I'm talking about China's dead rivers. 1/3 of China's rivers are dead. Bonifide cancer soups. And the people  protecting the rivers are the same people who are polluting them. Sound familiar???

    Hillary did not vote on FISA amendments strengthening civil liberties.

    by LandSurveyor on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:04:47 AM PDT

    •  American model? (0+ / 0-)

      hmmmm...no, not really. Soviet model, perhaps, but the U.S. can't really be blamed for China's environmental record.

      Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

      by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:08:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't agree totally (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        RAST, tallmom

        A lot of American companies go to China.  I doubt they are following American environmental laws there.

        McCain: Less jobs, more war.

        by Unstable Isotope on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:10:24 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not really, no (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Lesser Dane

          The chemical companies, refiners and other heavy industrial companies that pollute rivers are almost entirely Chinese owned, and most are controlled through majority stakes by the Chinese government. The only heavy industry companies from the US with much of a Chinese presence are automakers, and they aren't big polluters. For the most part, newer plants in China -- including most foreign-owned plants -- aren't too bad. The real heavy polluters are the older plants built by China in the 1980s and earlier.  

          Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

          by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:14:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Making products for u and me (0+ / 0-)

            to throw away.

            Hillary did not vote on FISA amendments strengthening civil liberties.

            by LandSurveyor on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 07:28:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  When you spread responsibility (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Sigrid of Horg

              too far, it stops meaning anything. If you say virtually every American is responsible because they buy Chinese goods which may have materials with precursors made in those plants, then no one is really responsible.

              China's government and Chinese chemical companies are responsible for the cleanliness and safety China's chemical plants.

              Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

              by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 07:53:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  US waters have probs & El Niño etc compound (0+ / 0-)

              many of the pollution problems. Right now I personally can't help clean up China, but I can help to clean up a stream in my own backyard.

              At last count, there were no  wild salmon rivers left in the State of Washington, due to pollution and dams, which is becoming truer of British Columbia and Southeast Alaska with each passing day.    

              Water Pollution facts for the US

              Water Pollution Fact #1: 40% of America's rivers are too polluted for fishing, swimming, or aquatic life.

              Water Pollution Fact #2: Even worse are America's lakes—46% are too polluted for fishing, swimming, or aquatic life.

              Water Pollution Fact #3: Two-thirds of US estuaries and bays are either moderately or severely degraded from eutrophication (nitrogen and phosphorus pollution).

              Etc......

              Locals won't eat the clams and oysters off our Northern Puget Sound beaches anymore.

  •  Deniers are organized (3+ / 0-)

    I find it very depressing, that even in scientific publications, whenever evolution or global warming is mentioned, they'll get a burst of letters denying them.  They have some kind of network, I think.

    McCain: Less jobs, more war.

    by Unstable Isotope on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:09:12 AM PDT

    •  That reminds me of something I (0+ / 0-)

      had seen on the Minnesota Republican Party website.  

      They had a software program where you could pick a topic and then you'd get a list of canned paragraphs that you could mix-and-match to "write" your LTE.

      Of course, you were encouraged to then change a word here or there to make the letter "your own".  It was disgusting, but I'm guessing that is what these gw-deniers use to generate the barrage of rebuttal letters.

      God, I miss Paul Wellstone.

      by Naniboujou on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:48:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I signed up for the RNC version (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        zinger99, Naniboujou

        It's a really nice tool that has all of the local media outlets.  When I was using it a lot, it would actually fax your letter if you asked it to do so.  When I sent them, I have modified their letters to remove all the lies, or alternately, just sent the letter with a warning that the media outlets can expect the canned letter and minor variations.

        I'm sure there are people who have jobs where they are expected to send letters denying global warming.  But the right wing noise machine has been propagandizing their people on this issue for years, and those people love their SUVs.  So you can expect a lot of denying by unpaid, unorganized volunteers.

        •  You are correct that they (0+ / 0-)

          send letters on their own.  

          I just have to think that they are probably not any more or less apt to write letters than "our side" is--we've got a lot of activists, too.  However, if you have a tool that writes the letter for you rather than putting any thought into the letter, the chances of sending off an LTE are much higher, IMO.  --Much the same as clicking to "sign" a petition as opposed to writing/sending a letter to your elected official gets a whole lot more people "signed on".

          I like how you used their tool to beat them at their own game.

          God, I miss Paul Wellstone.

          by Naniboujou on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 09:18:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Maybe, but... (0+ / 0-)

      I have nothing in common with any network of right-wing nutbags.  I hate Bush virulently, Cheney even more so.  I WILL spit on their graves.

      I agree with about 85% of what goes down on dkos.

      But the few times I have commented that I disagree with the global warming paradigm on here, I got my head ripped off, and I think that since then I have been blackballed.

      I have scientific reasons why I disagree with the GW thing, and I have looked into it a whole LOT, just trying to give the GW folks a chance to convince me.

      I remain unconvinced.  I think it is bad science, with a lot of hype over questionable interpretations of data, and an over-believing in the omniscience of computer modeling.  And most of the people who believe in it have never read the source materials, with their caveats and uncertainties.  Even when some of those uncertainties are included in news articles for the general public, the headlines attached blare certainty, even when the statements within the article bely such certainty.

      My underlying reason is that I have looked high and low for even ONE scientific paper that proves that natural variability cannot possibly be the source of the warming trend we seem to be experiencing.  Until they eliminate all other possibilities, any claims that humans are causing global warming are not logical.  I have yet to find such a paper.

      My secondary reason is that Chicago, where I live near, has been on a slow cooling trend, and it is not alone.  YES, many places are warming.  But many are not.  What is the overall?  And what about the temperatures in the open ocean, which is 71% of the surface?   There are only a handful of temprature gauges out there.

      My third reason is that there are three methods by which we measure the overall average temperature of the planet.  Two of the three say there is none.  The one that does, temperature readings from weather stations, has weaknesses in its methodology.  For instance, since 1980, about a third of these have been taken off line, and the 2/3 left are the ones nearest heat islands (cities), which distorts the overall average upward.  The rural ones were too inconvenient, so they have by and large been decommissioned.  No one mentions that in articles.  (The other two methods are radiosonde weather balloons and satellites.  They both agree quite closely, in case you're interested.  The explanation for the discrepency with thermometers on the ground?  Some explain it as methodological flaws.  I don't know, but if they are going to point fingers at methodologies, I have more ammo to throw at them, too...)

      I have maybe another 10 reasons to not assign it any validity, too many to list here.

      I don't see global warming as valid, and no one is coordinating me with anyone else.  The neocons and right-wingers and religious right make my flesh crawl.  I would never coordinate anything with them.  

      This is the ONE and ONLY thing that I agree with Bush on.  I hate that fucking wienie.  I hate saying that I agree with him on ANYTHING.

  •  Realclimate.org (5+ / 0-)

    On NPR last week, a professor from RealClimate was on to talk about this very issue.  He basically said what we're seeing is both El Nino and global warming.  He pointed out that the whole Continental U.S. was above normal.  He said that El Nino warms only the northeastern U.S., roughly 2 degrees.  Here in Buffalo, we're 7 degrees above normal.

    McCain: Less jobs, more war.

    by Unstable Isotope on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:13:07 AM PDT

    •  Here's a link for that (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      DarkSyde, rapala, tallmom

      RealClimate.org

      So what's really going on? The pattern so far this winter (admittedly after only 1 month) looks (figure on the immediate right) like a stronger version of what was observed last winter (figure to the far right--note that these anomalies reflect differences relative to a relatively warm 1971-2000 base period, this tends to decrease the amplitude of positive anomalies relative to the more commonly used, cooler 1961-1990 base period). This poses the first obvious conundrum for the pure "El Nino" attribution of the current warmth: since we were actually in a (weak) La Nina (i.e., the opposite of 'El Nino') last winter, how is it that we can explain away the anomalous winter U.S. warmth so far this winter by 'El Nino' when anomalous winter warmth last year occured in its absence?

      The second conundrum with this explanation is that, while El Nino typically does perturb the winter Northern Hemisphere jet stream in a way that favors anomalous warmth over much of the northern half of the U.S., the typical amplitude of the warming (see Figure below right) is about 1C (i.e., about 2F). The current anomaly is roughly five times as large as this. One therefore cannot sensibly argue that the current U.S. winter temperature anomalies are attributed entirely to the current moderate El Nino event

      .

      McCain: Less jobs, more war.

      by Unstable Isotope on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:15:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Current cold snap is only average (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Sigrid of Horg

      Look at the national temperature forecast map and you'll be hard pressed to see any place below zero.  Normally, when a front comes through the mid Atlantic and drops our temps below 30, you'll see daytime highs at 0 or below in the northern plains.

      This year, even when the cold is coming through, it isn't as powerful.

      What strikes me more than anything is the greater uniformity of temperature.  The temperature differentials are moderating, which is one of the likely results of global warming.  The poles warm faster than the equator reducing the atmospheric differential that drives a lot of our weather.

      - "You're Hells Angels, then? What chapter are you from?"
      - REVELATIONS, CHAPTER SIX.

      by Hoya90 on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:54:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  One could compare to ... (0+ / 0-)

      ... past El Niños.  But that would assume these mouthpieces give a rat's ass about data and analysis thereof.

      John McCain voted against health care for kids.

      by Land of Enchantment on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 12:18:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Dennis Feltgen, the former TV weather man? (5+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    gracchus, hhex65, DarkSyde, Naniboujou, tallmom
    WTSP-TV, Tampa, FL, 1989-99.
    KSTP-TV, Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN, 1978-86.

    If this is the same guy, he's not a scientist, just a hired mouth.

  •  Will Al Gore Melt in the Wall Street Journal (0+ / 0-)

    Did anyone read the piece in the Wall Street Journal's opinion page on Friday called Will Al Gore Melt?.  I usually scan, then skip that section, but stopped to read that one for a change. Since then, I've used Google to try and find a left-leaning blog to see how what the authors wrote in WSJ can be debunked.  Well, I see Free Republic and Redstate posted entries, nothing from our side. Can anyone help debunk it?  They refer repeatedly to the U.N. Climate Panel. Why would Al Gore's assertions be at odds with something called the U.N Climate Panel?

    It turns out news delivered on a for-profit basis is a bad business model for democracy.

    by George Lynch on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:42:03 AM PDT

      •  Thanks, but... (0+ / 0-)

        ...I had seen the article you linked to previously. I guess I was looking for a point-by-point refutation of what was stated in the opinion piece. Obviously, the U.N. climate panel agrees to the fact of global warming, but why would they say that sea levels will rise one foot while Gore says they will rise twenty feet?

        I'm sure the discrepancies they highlight amount to small discrepancies, but still, it seems if you can't refute things point-by-point, the right claims your whole position is bogus. As someone here once put it, if they find a chip of eggshell in the omlet, they claim the whole omlet is bad. It's a frustating trap, but how else do you shut down this false "contovery"?

        It turns out news delivered on a for-profit basis is a bad business model for democracy.

        by George Lynch on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:06:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  NW Coast, Bering Sea & Sweden (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    DarkSyde, rapala, tallmom

    In all my years of commercial fishing from Puget Sound in Washington State, north along the entire coast of Alaska to as far as Nome, I've experienced a few El Niño's. I've no reason to believe the experts who say that we are experiencing one now. I'm not a weather expert, but in my line of work one becomes very tuned into and aware of the seasonal patterns. This is not even near the same.  

    I was in the Near Aleutians last December; it looked and felt like spring. Here now, in NW Washington, aside from a big wind storm, a bit of snow, and several days of 20 degrees this month - nothing really out of the ordinary - what is unusual about this winter (and last) is that for the most, it feels very Springy. My apple trees bloomed in Decembre and the lawn that was mowed at around the same time needs to be mowed once again.  

    Christmas Day e-mail, from a friend who works for Sjöfartsverket (Swedish Maritime Administration) in Norrköping. In part:

    Christmas here was snow free even as far north as Luleå (near arctic circle). This has never happened before. We have 45-50 degrees (55 last week) and some sun. But the sun is so close to the horizon that it dives below it already at 3 PM.

    I'm headed back to Alaska. This is the Alaska weather map that everyone is watching right now.

    •  Can you say more (0+ / 0-)

      About the 'typical' temps that would be in this map?

      "Hook me up a new revolution 'cause this one is a lie"

      by tallmom on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:59:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There is definitely an El Nino (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      billlaurelMD, Sigrid of Horg

      but the weather we're seeing may not be SOLELY chalked up to the El Nino, from what I've read.

      Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

      by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:10:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  and the patterns with THIS El Nino (0+ / 0-)

        have been atypical, to say the least.

        Heavy rain in the Pacific NW (just ask a Kossack from Seattle about last November and December), and some snow even in valley/Puget Sound locations.  Very dry in CA.  

        As far as temperatures go, what's going on now is typical of a very strong El Nino (1982-83, 1997-98) for example, though even exaggerated from that, even though this is only a weak to moderate one.  What we're seeing, in my opinion and in the opinion of some more qualified people than I, is the superposition of the trend produced by greenhouse gas increases and the El Nino event we're having now.

        Political compass: -5.50 econ, -5.79 libertarian/authoritarian

        by billlaurelMD on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:49:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "Heavy Rain in the PNW" is a 365 phenomena (0+ / 0-)

          pushed by members of the Lesser Seattle Coalition who are dedicated (in humour) to keeping their city tourist-free. Or - never trust a Seattlite to tell the truth about the rain ;-)

          •  Um (0+ / 0-)

            The Pac NW does extend beyond King County, and in fact E WA has had unusually heavy spring and fall rains the last 2 years, in addition to abnormally cold weather in late Nov/early Dec both years.

            I have my fears, but they do not have me - Peter Gabriel

            by badger on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 02:03:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I live in San Juan Islands N of Seattle. Rain (0+ / 0-)

              here (now) is less than normal, but when it does rain, is heavier than normal. It maybe doesn't seem like much rain now cos we had so dang much of it in early 2006 - which then turned into a dry spell that was much more unusual for here. My apple trees and hollyhocks bloomed in early Decembre (just before the big wind storm). And I've had to mow the lawn twice since then. My closest river - the Skagit - has not been at flood stage nearly as often as normal this winter. Areas west of Seattle have gotten more rain and they always do. Eastern Washington's weather is usually colder in winter, hotter in summer, drier in both. Lesser Seattle is real - bad joke - but real. They do tell tourists that it rains here every day.

      •  Missing the point. (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        RAST

        There is definitely an El Nino

        Right, so the temperature change is due El Nino, not global warming. What, pray, is the cause of the increasing and increasingly atypical El Nino activity?

        Saying "The warmth doesn't result from global warming, but from El Nino!" is like saying "The warmth doesn't result from global warming, but from the fact that the temperature is higher!"

        -9.63, 0.00
        Anti-groupthink is the groupthink of the anti-groupthink group.

        by nobody at all on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:31:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Where to start (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          badger, Sigrid of Horg

          El Nino is a moderately well-understood effect, that doesn't in itself require global warming to be explained. It may be becoming more frequent because fo global warming, but that hasn't be proved yet. Saying that El Nino itself is self-evidently an effect of global warming simply isn't accurate.

          Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

          by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 06:56:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Did you see me say that? (0+ / 0-)

            What you saw me say is that El Nino activity is increasingly varying from the archetypal El Nino activity both in frequency and in magnitude, and that attributing anomalous weather patterns to already atypical El Nino activity is simply a way of displacing the question about cause and avoiding the question altogether, and should be followed up with "So what, then, is the cause of the collapsing (i.e. shortening) El Nino cycle and its atypical manifestation?"

            Read my analogy again: Saying "The warmth doesn't result from global warming, but from El Nino!" is like saying "The warmth doesn't result from global warming, but from the fact that the temperature is higher!"

            In either case, one hasn't addressed the question of the cause, just displaced the question.

            -9.63, 0.00
            Anti-groupthink is the groupthink of the anti-groupthink group.

            by nobody at all on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 07:08:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hmm, okay (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Sigrid of Horg

              So, basically, we need more research.

              Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

              by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 07:15:09 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'd phrase it as (0+ / 0-)

                saying that the current weather is definitely not global warming and definitely is El Nino is a politically motivated, willfully deceptive move made to look like an answer, not a scientific answer in and of itself. Whether or not we have a scientific answer yet is another issue, but this definitely wasn't it, though it claims to be.

                -9.63, 0.00
                Anti-groupthink is the groupthink of the anti-groupthink group.

                by nobody at all on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 07:32:47 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  That I can agree with, cos I am stumped on... (0+ / 0-)

                Saying that El Nino itself is self-evidently an effect of global warming simply isn't accurate.

                ... just how to explain what I am seeing, feeling, and sensing, based upon what I know from my past experiences upon land and at sea. While it is "El Niño-ish", that blanket doesn't quite cover this whole mess.

                •  Try this. . . (2+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  badger, Sigrid of Horg

                  . . .ENSO predates the accepted anthropomorphic atmospheric inputs associated with increasing global mean temperature, that is, Industrial Age carbon dioxide waste.

                  In other words, El Niño has been affecting the weather longer than human-caused global warming has been around.

                  It is speculated that global warming may increase the frequency and/or severity of El Niño/La Niña events, but the specifics of this relationship aren't firmly established yet. In any case, to say that a particular season's weather pattern is caused by global warming is not correct - google "correlation is not causation."

                  We're supposed to be the smart ones, remember? When we flub basic science with shrill and intemperate attacks, we only give credence to the Know-Nothings.

                  Paz.

                  Ceux qui peuvent vous faire croire à des absurdités peuvent vous faire commettre des atrocités.

                  by Orange County Liberal on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 10:18:46 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Right & I really don't know what to think & so I (0+ / 0-)

                    It is speculated that global warming may increase the frequency and/or severity of El Niño/La Niña events, but the specifics of this relationship aren't firmly established yet. In any case, to say that a particular season's weather pattern is caused by global warming is not correct

                    should probably just keep my mouth shut. I speak only from personal experiance, merely as one who has made her living at sea - not a weather expert by any means, although I've not - and won't - call what I have/am seeing at sea and on land in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska, El Niño. I don't give El Niño credit for this, as I believe it to be much more than that. El Niño is too "cliché"; weather patterns I have/do observe are not that "static". BUT my puzzlement over the gradual but very real weather changes that I've witnessed, especially at sea, isn't helping me to explain any of what I have/am seeing one little bit. I am looking back at, and I do see, a slow but very sure gradual warming trend recorded over a 20+/- span of years in my Log books (ship logs covering Puget Sound, Southeast Alaska, Prince William Sound, the Kodiak district, Near Aleutians, Bristol Bay, Norton Sound).

    •  Again (3+ / 0-)

      a single season or two is not neceesarily going to serve as a useful sample. But what your anecdote descibes sounds disturbingly like first-hand experience in the midst of full blown Polar Amplification. This is a relatively recently predicted consequence of global warming. Because of positive feedback in the polar region[s], a rise of 2 to 4 degrees globally might translate into a rise of 5 to 10 degrees in the polar regions.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:14:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Very serious concern in Canada (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        DarkSyde, Sigrid of Horg

        where there has already been significant changes in the far northern climate...plus the tree line and temperate species are creeping further north.

        Je suis Marxiste, tendance Groucho.

        by gracchus on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:16:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  In the course of 30+/- yrs I've seen dramatic (0+ / 0-)

        change in AK's weather - most notably in the past 5, but starting back around 10, and most notably in the taiga and tundra. I took many photos in the Near Aleutians last Decembre. If you didn't know better, no way you'd believe they were taken on Umnak or Unalaska Islands. If I knew how to post a pix here, I would.  

    •  and this year.... (0+ / 0-)

      in AK, it's been cold and snowy.  The Aleutians have had snow cover continuously (at least at Cold Bay) since early December.

      However, globally, it's been VERY VERY warm.

      Incidentally, it appears that the pattern over N America has finally changed...looks pretty cold to me for the next couple of weeks from the great plains to the east coast.

      Political compass: -5.50 econ, -5.79 libertarian/authoritarian

      by billlaurelMD on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 05:45:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I am curious (0+ / 0-)

    What happened to the hurricans season last year?
    What will be the result of the heat remaining trapped in the water?

    "Hook me up a new revolution 'cause this one is a lie"

    by tallmom on Sun Jan 21, 2007 at 04:58:22 AM PDT