It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Should we be seeing these Snowstorms if Global Warming was Real?

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 07:29 PM
reply to post by grantbeed

Definately, re: 4 seasons. I know for example, from family experience with hay harvesting, which has tuned us into issues around other crops (wheat) that a formerly reasonably predictable pattern of events seems to have changed, and for 2-3 years farmers here have struggled to get a dry spell long enough to get their crops in. They have even resorted to working through the nights. I get the impression this is definately new (outside living memory) and that based on the other noticeable observations about seasonal disruption, is also worrying in terms of the cumulative disruption to crop/plant production - too many things are getting out of sync'?

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 07:30 PM
reply to post by endisnighe

Im not saying they're not! I agree with you to a certain extent. I do think the government are playing it for all they can.

I just dont want this post to turn into a debate about the cause of climate change. Im just trying to get some more opinions about,

"if we are in the midst of global warming, then why are we getting record snowfalls"

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 07:33 PM
reply to post by ProfEmeritus

"If we run out of oil it is because of global warming" ?

Er, OK?

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 07:41 PM
reply to post by endisnighe

Actually, I get the impression the science has changed an AWFUL lot.

The amount of detail and data that has impacted our understanding of our terrestrial and extra terrestrial universe since the hypothesis put forward by some scientists in the 70s about a likely ice age is VAST.

If you look at the transformation and growth of data, through land based and satellite observations, and advances in computational analysis and modelling, additional ice-core and geological surveying, archeology, etc.... produced in the last 25-35 years, plus the impact on information exchange and communication/data access and publishing rates on scientific's staggering actually.

[edit on 19-12-2009 by curioustype]

[edit on 19-12-2009 by curioustype]

[edit on 19-12-2009 by curioustype]

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 07:42 PM
I think Monkey66 hit it right on the head...

I don't think GW is totally man made.

I think there have been some ooops moments with HAARP and other like
Operations as far as the truly irradical weather goes.

The positives that I like from it come down to the cleaning up of the planet from horridness mess Humans have made,
But I am against these "taxes" and the "trading" of carbon credits. Seems like nothing more than a new market to Tax the people while giving a green light for the big money to have a free pass to do as they please (pollution wise) if they can "buy" these credits.

The earth goes through changes... I personally am just happy that we (here in No Cal.) are getting Some rain and snow and having a winter again.....
I was personally tired of year round summer.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 07:48 PM
Co2, WTF do we do every time we breath? it is a cycle, Oxygen in, Carbon Dioxide out... did you ever die from a French Kiss? don't anwer that. Climate change may also be a cycle but maybe irregular, who would argue with that. So what next? kill all the animules other than humans.. that'll make a difference for sure, oops, sorry I meant to say kill most of the humans. Tonights BBC24 news at midnight was ironic, right after the snow problems stories, was the report on the Copenhagen conference

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 08:00 PM
well, if, and that is IF you actually buy into most of the global warming from human intervention twaddle, one of the scenarios you'll see come up is fesh water ice melt off and runout disrupting some of the major ocean currents, which act as heat pipelines to variou sparts of the globe.

possible, but they're showing the ice caps are getting thicker last i checked.

one theory I've looked into that seems plausible in its own way is that a slight (we're talking a degree or two) increase in temperature increases the air's ability to hold water (think relative humidity) which provides more water to condense out during a cold shock (basic rain mechanics).

at the same time, I think its all a bunch of crap. Here's my outlook on it... remember 9/11 when all teh planes were grounded for a while? within a fewe days, suddenly all teh weather started obeying the weather models again, weather became predictable, normal(er) and so on.

I honestly think that its somethign with all teh air travel that is whats doing it.

no, not chemtrails either, thats a farce.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 08:28 PM
reply to post by smurfy

You're right of course, there has LONG been a cycle of gas exchange, breathing, photosynthesis, methane release, etc...even non life gas change (volcanic)...

But other facts complicate matters:

1. Human population growth globally, and regionally over the past millenia (as currently understood by science), last ten centuries, and by decade since 1900 - it's changed - a lot.

2. The changes in energy use, food production, diet, lifestyle especially since the industrial revolution, and the emerging differences between 'developed'/western economies and the others, and the differences in emissions/consumption - they changed - a lot.

3. The decline, in other species (than human), alongside our population growth, and the impact on well established long-term habitats (e.g. Rain Forests, Seas, Lakes, Rivers, etc) - they changed - a lot (all previously long established contributors to the previous balance/maths of all previous climate changes - now many are absent - what will that do?).

4. It's not just about what is emitted, it's about when, where, how much, is emitted, and the rate of change. It's about the fact that we have changed the face of the earth radically, and due to exponential growth in the momentum of that change due to population, technological and economic changes, it looks like we may be on a tipping point.

It's a complex combination of things coming together, but essentially about growth, change, dominance, destruction, and imbalance.

The skeptics arguments about other forces outweighing our impact never seem to acknowledge that even if they're correct about those forces being present/dominant in the past, we still can't tell what would be the new outcome were those same natural events/forces to reoccur to the same levels now, given the impact of man since then, or that the reaction of the climate would be the same - given the obvious grand changes mankind has implemented since their previous occurances?

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 08:38 PM
Global warming is a progressive trend that at a certain point caused the jet stream to collapse and actually causes us to have an Ice Age.

See this:

But that does not mean we will always have hot weather all over the globe. The warm regions will get hotter and the cold regions will get warmer. During winter the cold regions will still be able to produce snow. Once the Jet stream starts to collapse things will get much harder on us. Man can survive ice ages but it won't be easy/

A lot of scientist think we have been over due for an ice age for over 3000 years.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 08:55 PM
Rule #1: The Sun and Volcanoes control the climate on Earth. Man may pollute but has zip effect on the climate. CO2 is good, plants love it.
Rule #2: See rule #1

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:03 PM

Originally posted by munkey66
As much as I disagree with man mace global warming, just because we have snow falls does not mean that the planet is not naturally heating, you won't get snow falls or rain unless the planet is warm due to evaporation.

So you will get blizzards and tropical storms as well as floods because of a warm temperatures.
These sort of arguments do not actually help our cause because they are the easiest to find fault with.

most of us believe in climate change, we just disagree how much man is to blame and what we are against 100% is any form of tax on Co2.

Correction: You do not get "Blizzards" because of warm temperatures. It must be cold for precipitation to fall to the ground in a frozen state.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:05 PM
"Global Warming" implies that the average global temperature is increasing by several degrees. This might mean that somewhere in the north, temperatures may be -10 degrees lower than normal on average, whilst those at the equator might be 12 degrees higher. Thus, the average global temperature increases by 2 degrees. The whole planet doesnt warm up, rather the average recorded temperature does. They are different things so dont get them confused.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:12 PM
One thing that people need to remember, is that original AGW Theory dictated that we would see a decrease in our Winter Seasons, and some even predicted a complete absence of Winter. However, we have in fact been witnessing a complete absence of Summer over many portions of the U.S. (As well as other regions), and our Winters have become increasingly Cold with sustained periods of record breaking Snowfall. Therefore, AGW Theory has yet again been proven extremely flawed at best, and downright false in terms of its predictions.

Note: This very phenomenon displays why the activists suddenly scrapped the term "Global Warming", and replaced it instead with "Climate Change". With "Climate Change" being their new pushed for agenda, they can claim to be correct no matter how much Warmer it gets, nor how much Colder it becomes. No matter which way the Weather and Climate in fact trend, the "Climate Change" Proponents will/can still claim to be correct. In other words, it is one giant farce at this point.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:20 PM

Originally posted by funny_pom
"Global Warming" implies that the average global temperature is increasing by several degrees. This might mean that somewhere in the north, temperatures may be -10 degrees lower than normal on average, whilst those at the equator might be 12 degrees higher. Thus, the average global temperature increases by 2 degrees. The whole planet doesnt warm up, rather the average recorded temperature does. They are different things so dont get them confused.

That is actually not part of the original theory at all. AGW Theory described greater warming the higher in Latitude you go, whereas the Equatorial regions would exhibit the least impact of such (3 Degrees Celsius vs. 1 Degree Celsius was the claimed observation). The now touted "Cooling vs. Warming Regions" is a simple excuse used by the "Climate Change" crowd (Who btw, display an extreme lack of scientific knowledge, and/or integrity).

Please note: I am not bashing you with the last statement, but I am bashing the irresponsible individuals who should know better than to abuse the trust which the public harbors in them, all the while they espouse falsehoods.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:40 PM
reply to post by grantbeed

I have been following this topic for a long time now and I can categorically place myself into the camp of the skeptic.

I don't believe everything David Icke says but I do believe that the MO of Problem, Reaction, Solution, is a technique of manipulation being used on us constantly now.

Global war on terrorism
Global financial crisis
Global warming

Global fear

Global governance

The reasons I am a skeptic are far to numerous for me to list but it will be snowing in hell before they convince me otherwise

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:48 PM
Ya know, I've been on this computer on and off all day because it is snowing and freezing rain here in central NC. I tried to call Al Gore and ask him "Where the hell is my global warming?" The machine said he would get back with me...ya see, ever since I heard about this global warming thang, I stocked up on sunblock, swim trunks, steaks, beer, and guess's snowing. According to the maps, the southside of my house should be ocean front, built a big dang grill there and fancy picnic shelter from Walmart... even got me some of those outdoor speakers that look like rocks. To add realism I spray painted graffitti on them. They look good too. But again, where's my warming?... gotta go, snows piling up on them steaks.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:50 PM
reply to post by kennyb72

nice post. I think you have this sussed! Pity about the billions of others who have the wool over their eyes!

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:51 PM
reply to post by AlreadyGone

lol, i know what you mean. Not been too bad here in New Zealand, but I know back in my homeland of Scotland, theres a similar thing.

Freezin cold when its supposed to be Summer.

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:52 PM
Reply to post by grantbeed

And SE Texas has been getting snow and they are talking about. My skepticism level towards AGW continues to go ever up. Climate shift perhaps doesn't seem to be warming though.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 09:54 PM
reply to post by grantbeed

We will all be pulling the wool over our bodies if we get much more of this global warming

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in