Handy Guide to how Global Warming/Climate Change exists despite today's cold weather

[zulchzulu]

Many climate change naysayers make the obvious mistake equating weather to climate.



There's weather:

weather (n) - the state of the atmosphere with respect to wind, temperature, cloudiness, moisture, pressure, etc.

For instance: a strong wind or storm or strong winds and storms collectively: We've had some real weather this spring.

Then there's climate:

climate (n) - the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region, as temperature, air pressure, humidity, precipitation, sunshine, cloudiness, and winds, throughout the year, averaged over a series of years.

Then, there's this fun little graphic:



So if it's cold today in Topeka in January, does that mean there is no "global warming"? If you're an apologist for the oil/coal industries and/or believe Fox News/Drudge and the legion of GOP college dropout puppets, you are a sucker confusing weather with climate.

So whenever someone chuckles about cold weather happening and mention how Al Gore is wrong, just assume that person is mixing up "climate" with "weather".

Then there is also a growing concern that the warming of the planet could actually lead to a new Ice Age:

...the ice records show repeated patterns of sudden warming, called Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles, when temperatures in Greenland rose by five to 10 degrees Celsius over a few decades.

Those cycles were matched by rapid changes in surface-water salinity in the north Atlantic, the researchers found. The Atlantic got saltier during cold periods, and fresher during warm intervals. The freshening likely reflects shifts in rainfall patterns, mostly in the tropics, Spero said.

"Suddenly, we're looking at a record that links moisture balance in the tropics to climate change," he said.

Close to the tropics, warm, moist air forms a zone of heavy tropical rainfall, called the Intertropical Convergence Zone, which dilutes the salty ocean with fresh water. Today, the tropical rainfall zone reaches into the northern Caribbean, but during the colder periods of the ice age it was pushed much farther south, toward Brazil. That kept fresh water out of the northern Atlantic, so it became more salty, Spero said.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061004180029.htm

Back to that term "global warming". It is a term that gets used by climate change naysayers "proving" it doesn't exist if some town has a snowstorm last Thursday.
Does global warming exist, even if there was a snow storm in Peoria last Wednesday? Remember the 2004 film The Day After Tomorrow? Entertaining stuff, but then there's actual science...

Here is an incredible resource with some basic facts:

• Average temperatures have climbed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius) around the world since 1880, much of this in recent decades, according to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
  
  
• The rate of warming is increasing. The 20th century's last two decades were the hottest in 400 years and possibly the warmest for several millennia, according to a number of climate studies. And the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that 11 of the past 12 years are among the dozen warmest since 1850.
  
  
• The Arctic is feeling the effects the most. Average temperatures in Alaska, western Canada, and eastern Russia have risen at twice the global average, according to the multinational Arctic Climate Impact Assessment report compiled between 2000 and 2004.
  
  
• Arctic ice is rapidly disappearing, and the region may have its first completely ice-free summer by 2040 or earlier. Polar bears and indigenous cultures are already suffering from the sea-ice loss.
  
  
• Glaciers and mountain snows are rapidly melting—for example, Montana's Glacier National Park now has only 27 glaciers, versus 150 in 1910. In the Northern Hemisphere, thaws also come a week earlier in spring and freezes begin a week later.
  
  
• Coral reefs, which are highly sensitive to small changes in water temperature, suffered the worst bleaching—or die-off in response to stress—ever recorded in 1998, with some areas seeing bleach rates of 70 percent. Experts expect these sorts of events to increase in frequency and intensity in the next 50 years as sea temperatures rise.
  
  
• An upsurge in the amount of extreme weather events, such as wildfires, heat waves, and strong tropical storms, is also attributed in part to climate change by some experts.
  
  http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming.html

NASA has an incredible site on many levels of evidence of climate change. There's college dropout knuckleheads like Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck saying there is no climate change. Then there are things called satellites, science, scientists and verifiable proof. They also make some nice graphics:

Arctic sea ice reaches its minimum extent each September. The graph on the left charts the average September extent from 1979 to 2009, derived from satellite observations. The illustration on the right shows the Arctic sea ice minimum extent for 2009, which was the third-lowest in the satellite record.


The chart on the left shows historical sea level data derived from coastal tide gauge records. The chart on the right shows the average sea level since 1993 derived from global satellite measurements, updated here monthly. Sea level rise is associated with the thermal expansion of sea water due to climate warming and widespread melting of land ice.


The time series shows the combined global land and marine surface temperature record from 1850 to 2008. The year 2008 was tenth warmest on record, exceeded by 1998, 2005, 2003, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2001, 2007 and 1997.


The "ozone hole" is a severe depletion of the ozone layer high above Antarctica. It is primarily caused by human-produced compounds that release chlorine and bromine gases in the stratosphere. The ozone layer acts to protect life on Earth by blocking harmful ultraviolet rays from the sun.

The image is a view of the most recent Antarctic ozone hole, derived from satellite measurements that monitor the ozone layer. The blue and purple colors are where there is the least ozone, and the greens, yellows, and reds are where more ozone is present.
Source: http://climate.nasa.gov

Of course, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has some very good information on climate change. Presentations in PDF and webcast format are available:
http://www.ipcc.ch/presentations_and_speeches/presentations_and_speeches_presentations.htm

A great site "Climate Analysis Indicators Tool" (http://cait.wri.org/figures.php) offers a lot of info on scientific basis of climate change.

Another incredible resource for many issues besides global warming/climate change is the Union of Concerned Scientists web site (http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/). Besides an incredible volume of information and other content, the site tackles the so-called "ClimateGate" misinformation drummed up by the Usual Right Wing Suspects and thouroughly debunks the nonsense:

While the emails have raised some concerns, the email content being quoted does not indicate that climate data and research have been compromised. Most importantly, nothing in the content of these stolen emails has any impact on our overall understanding that human activities are driving dangerous levels of global warming. Media reports and contrarian claims that they do are inaccurate.
(snip)
Much has been made about emails regarding a certain paper that some scientists did not think should have been published in a peer-reviewed academic journal. These emails focus on a paper on solar variability in the climate over time. It was published in a peer-reviewed journal called Climate Research, but under unusual circumstances. Half of the editorial board of Climate Research resigned in protest against what they felt was a failure of the peer review process. The paper, which argued that current warming was unexceptional, was disputed by scientists whose work was cited in the paper. Many subsequent publications set the record straight, which demonstrates how the peer review process over time tends to correct such lapses. Scientists later discovered that the paper was funded by the American Petroleum Institute.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/global_warming_contrarians/debunking-misinformation-stolen-emails-climategate.html

Here's a partial list of organizations that support the notion that climate change is indeed a problem:

InterAcademy Council
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
Network of African Science Academies
Royal Society of New Zealand
Polish Academy of Sciences
National Research Council (US)
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Institute of Physics
American Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
American Geophysical Union
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
American Meteorological Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
World Meteorological Organization
American Quaternary Association
International Union for Quaternary Research
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
NASA
American Society for Microbiology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Institute of Biology (UK)
Society of American Foresters
The Wildlife Society (international)
American Academy of Pediatrics
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Medical Association
American Public Health Association
Australian Medical Association
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Health Organization
American Astronomical Society
American Statistical Association
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)
International Association for Great Lakes Research
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

If you want to check out the Climate Change skeptics, a wonderful site has them in the crosshairs. Here's a portion:

Ian Plimer, a Professor of Mining Geology at the University of Adelaide, South Australia, is the author of Heaven and Earth, a book hailed by climate change skeptics. Plimer is also a director of three mining companies: Ivanhoe Australia, a subsidiary of Bob Friedland's Ivanhoe Mines, CBH Resources and Kefi Minerals.

Patrick J. Michaels is the Editor of the World Climate Report, a blog published by New Hope Environmental Services, "an advocacy science consulting firm" he founded and runs. Michaels, who is considered to be one of the leading global warming skeptics, has long been a speaker to various think tanks, trade associations and energy and other companies. On a 2007 academic CV, Michaels disclosed that prior to creating New Hope Environmental Services he had received funding from the Edison Electric Institute and the Western Fuels Association.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Portal:Climate_Change/div]

Just for giggles, look at the list of industry-funded groups and think tanks who you're likely to see pimping the idea that global warming/climate change doesn't exist because it's cold in Britain:

* Americans for Prosperity
* Cooler Heads Coalition
* Friends of Science Society (Canada)
* Frontiers of Freedom
* Global Climate Coalition
* Greening Earth Society
* Institute of Public Affairs
* Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP) (Canada)
* Science and Environmental Policy Project
* George C. Marshall Institute
* Scientific Alliance

Source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Industry-funded_groups_and_think_tanks_opposing_the_Kyoto_treaty

Go here for even more info, download the book:
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/



Of course, there's this site:
http://www.climatecrisis.net/

[busymom]

1. Thank you for this...

I was looking for something right along these lines.

[zulchzulu]

4. I've been wanting to do something like this for a while

There's so much overwhelming evidence of climate change and I frankly was sick and tired of seeing and hearing people saying it's cold outside so the whole climate change "thing" must not be real...

[bhikkhu]

20. But where's the data?

...sorry, couldn't resist. It just seems like every good informative post on climate change gets the above question regardless of how much data and links to data you include.

Well done :thumbsup:

[Parker CA]

2. Excellent post. Thanks!

[RepublicanElephant]

3. brilliant!

thanks a lot!
:yourock:

[DeepModem Mom]

5. Thank you! K&R!

[zulchzulu]

6. Maybe I'll do a compilation of right wingers propagating the lie...

...where they want people to confuse weather with climate.

Stay tuned.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. Hi zulchzulu. I've never rec'd one of your posts before, but this is nicely done

k/r

[zulchzulu]

11. Cool!

Hopefully this is helpful.

[Soylent Brice]

8. K&R and bookmarked

[TrogL]

9. Weather vs. global warming can be explained in one sentence

Global warming doesn't necessarily make the weather warmer at any specific time, it makes it crazier.

[TrogL]

10. Nay-sayers refute this with a single sentence

"We are currently on the upswing of an ongoing series of warm/cold climactic cycles, hence current attempts to fix the problem by reduction in greenhouse gases are useless."

What they don't point it is that the current rate of increase is way beyond normal.

[Richard D]

21. Ask them . . .

Why? Explain the first law of thermodynamics ( I know, you'll lose 90 percent of them as soon as you say a word with more than 3 syllables in it). Ask then what the source of heat is that is making the ice caps melt. They'll inevitably start yelling about Al Gore being a communist or some other such nonsense at that point.

[xxqqqzme]

23. Too true. The exact path my mother follows.

I asked her, a year ago, why she was so angry @ Gore since he has no power. I'm still waiting for the answer.

[madamesilverspurs]

12. Excellent, will share.

Have to wonder, though, how all this would be received by the person who complained about Congress' extending Daylight Saving. According to said complainer, the joke was on the liberal global-warming mongers because the extension would give the sun that much more time to heat the earth. . .

(That was in a letter-to-the-editor, I think in Kentucky, but I haven't been able to find a link to it. If anyone has the link, I'd love to put the little gem back into my archives.)

---

[Union Yes]

13. Great post! KNR & bookmarked.

:applause: :fistbump:

[proReality]

14. Too late to recommend, but I can kick it.

Good post!

[Divine Discontent]

15. great post. good job. k&R

[The_Commonist]

16. Great resources here...

Thanks!

[PVnRT]

17. Kick, but too late to recommend

[ChucktownMillie]

18. goes both ways

youre certainly correct that weather and climate are confused.
but ive seen it misused in both directions too. not only do
people look out the window, see snow and think no global
warming. but they also see a high summer temperature or a big
hurricane and claim that as evidence FOR global warming.

good resources included in the post.

[chat_noir]

19. Great job! You should post this in the DU Research Forum

[Political_Junkie]

22. Too late to rec, but

K & R and bookmarked!

[Mendocino]

24. Ask a naysayer this question?

What continent is the recieves the least precipitation? I would be willing to say that 95% answer wrong.




















Antarctica

[stuart68]

28. huh ?

what does that have to do with anything global warming ?

[Mendocino]

30. It is that they do not understand weather and climate.

They would assume that Antarctica receives much precipitation since it is snow covered. It gets very little. The blinding drifting snow you might see there is just extremely dry snow that blows in the incessant wind. It just doesn't melt, accumulating over thousands of years into miles deep layers. Some coastal areas there do get heavy snow (because they are warmer), but overall it is the driest continent. Other areas of the world that do receive heavy snow aren't necessarily cold. It snows less in extremely cold areas. Air humidity is essential for snowfall. Rising overall temperatures cause more snow as long it remains below freezing.

So when they look out and its snowing, they assume because the world is still cold overall, thus no warming. It is simply not true.

[Vattel]

25. nice compilation.

small point though: you say: "Then there is also a growing concern that the warming of the planet could actually lead to a new Ice Age," but the article you then quote and provide a link to doesn't support that claim.

[zulchzulu]

27. Actually...

...if you can find anywhere in the article where it says that the ice age is not a possibility, I'd be grateful. I revisited the article and found only specualtions that the salinity of the oceans and those changes could lead to a new ice age.

[defendandprotect]

26. "Global Warming" makes clear we are HEATING up our atmosphere . . .

Stick with "Global Warming" --

Climinate Change seeks to sound like something normal -- and of course this is not.

Back later when I have some time to look over the info and thank you!

[ChucktownMillie]

39. climate change IS natural

defendandprotect...

if there were previous ice ages and warming periods then climate change IS SOMETHING NATURAL. whether man is making it happen at a fast pace is a different issue

[stuart68]

29. sorry

just couldn't get past this one...

"Then there is also a growing concern that the warming of the planet could actually lead to a new Ice Age

[sam sarrha]

31. the Halocene &Thermocline drives warm water to the poles. warning the general earth climate, when it

stops cause there is no ice to melt.. it gets cold where it used to be "Warmed". we have been in an "Ice Age" for about 1.5 million years.. with "Warm Periods".. like the last one we have been enjoying... it is over now. it could take at least 1000 years to 5000 years for the cycle to fix itself.. if it is fixable. it could "Runaway" one way or the other.. the earth could 'Snow Ball' or it could heat up to 280* and start raining sulfuric acid like Venus.

whatever happens the best estimates are the human race will be reduced below a billion, maybe half that..maybe less.. the last ice age period fluctuation humans were reduced to around 1000-2000 individuals.. but the eruption of Toba had some effect also on population.

http://www.solcomhouse.com/oceans.htm

[stuart68]

33. no offense

but we continually extrapolate models based on a limited set of criteria that, in my opinion, fit a bias. When critical factors are overlooked, and when subscribers to the theory stop attempting to break the model but spend all their time trying to bolster it with a lot superflous data, then science has turned into religion.

That is precisely what this warming thing is, a religion. It is like the crusades or jihad, kill the non-believers.

I am a non-believer. not in temperature change, but in the myth that we understand the mechanism and can pin it to carbon (it used to be the ozone hole that was going to be the death of us all).

Now we are going to overturn the Constitution to support this religion - ie, the EPA WILL implement regulations if Congress chooses not to do so. What ? Who the hell are these appointed ones to make policy ?

[zulchzulu]

34. The Science of Data is not a Religion of Myths. You utterly don't understand what's at stake

The "warming thing" is not a religion. Tell that to 97% of scientists who can point to scientific DATA (not myths) as indicators of climate change.

Perhaps if you checked out some of the links I posted in the OP, you'd get a better understanding. Good luck.

[stuart68]

35. I did check out the links

do you mean to say that 97% of scientists believe in mm global warming or 97% of those who believe use data.

I watched in 9th grade when my math teacher literally proved 1+1=3. It was amazing to see, an was done by embedding a seemingly trivial (but inaccurate) assumption into a set of equations that ultimately led to provign somethig that is false.

If you are sayign that 97% of scientists believe this, that is just (again) inaccurate).

I do understand what is at stake - it is utterly fooling developing nations into giving up their ability to develop into global manufacturign competitors and enriching Al Gore and Goldmann Sachs by implementing a bogus market for trading carbon credits.

[zulchzulu]

36. We can hem and haw about the percent of scientists... but science is based on data

Religion is based on myths.

You can't equate scientific data with religious "inventiveness" based on fairies, ghosts in the night, stories passed down generations and appended with more myth-making...

The sheer overwhelming data showing climate change is not like some story some guy made up about a spirit in the sky with a son and a bird...

[stuart68]

37. I take it your not a Christian

my analogy to religion is about the emotional attachement people develop to findings and the change at all costs mentality, not to mention the kill the non-believers attitude.

Many of these data are events that are strung together to produce an expected outcome. Volcano erupts, throw virgin in volcano, volcano quiets down - god of volcano is happy.

Now everyone is telling me that although the called for a monstrous set of tropical storms, and brutal heat, the lack of catastrophic storms and bitter cold (even an ice age) are in fact proof that warming is man-made.

we should not make the data fit the theory.

[sam sarrha]

46. the man made carbon has a "Sub-Atomic" signature... you can tell which it is, what percent it is,

where it came from... does that explain it for you.???

[stuart68]

49. is wikipedia

the 60 year old marine biologist's best friend ?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

47. I take it you're not either.

Given the constant violation of that commandment. You know, the one about not giving false witness.

[stuart68]

50. as a matter of fact

I am, thanks for asking.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

54. Nah.

Not really.

[stuart68]

55. Now this is the definition

of a mature debate !

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

56. Global warming deniers aren't interested in mature debate.

Not any more than Creationists or Holocaust deniers.

[stuart68]

57. Wow

thanks for the insight - you equate the global warming debate with the holocaust ?

scary...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. I equate global warming deniers with holocaust deniers.

Intellectually and morally.

[stuart68]

59. Funny,

you seem to have no clue as to the nuances of debating genocide vs debating an as-yet unproven (despite all te subscribers) theory.

you have no concept of moral equivalency.

[stuart68]

60. just to clear it up for you,

one is factual, one is theoretical.

Do I need to explain which is which ?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

62. Both are factual.

The holocaust denier would say the holocaust is theoretical too.

That's why you're the same sort of person.

[stuart68]

63. nice try

but a pile of murder victims does not equate to a series of flawed data models.

You keep trying to bait me, but trust me, I will not stoop to making the same kind of baseless, ignorant and sophmoric comments about your opinions as you do of mine.


Like how I worked it in anyway?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

65. Awww

:nopity:

Stuart, you're a global warming denier. All you've got are baseless, ignorant, and sophomoric comments.

Just like any given holocaust denier.

[stuart68]

66. Nice fiddle

one tune, just like your replies. Wait let me guess, your next reply will try to weave in your belief that I am just like a holocaust denier.

wait for it, wait for it.....

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

69. We already established that.

Would you like to move on, or shall we keep proving my point?

[stuart68]

70. proving what point

you have yet to prove anything.

What would you like to move on to ?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

71. Pretty much all of them.

[stuart68]

72. A little help

you started by questioning if I were really a Christian, and the on the repeated holocaust denier slop.

All of what ? try to string a couple logical sentences together....

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

73. Oh, I didn't ask a question.

You're not

That's a statement.

[stuart68]

74. down to 11 words

we're close to no response...

what next ?

[stuart68]

75. ahhhhh. peace and quiet...

[Lilith Velkor]

61. Didn't you read the link he provided proving that Al Gore is out to impoverish the world?

Oh wait, he didn't. Nevermind.

[stuart68]

64. Why woudl I provide a link

Third world nations will clearly not receive help from the wealthy nations, as demonstrated in Copenhagen. We walked away not having made any committments, but asking India and China to stop burning coal and cow dung to heat the slums (not exactly but the same result). LET THEM EAT CAKE ! Al, shut down one wing of th emansion and feed a small village with the energy savings.

keep kissing his butt as he make tens of millions on this topic.

[Lilith Velkor]

67. Oh, so you demand that I take it on faith that Al Gore is evil.

Got any proof?

[stuart68]

68. try to stay with me here

this is my opinion - feel free to take it or leave it.

need further explanation on this concept of opinion ?

[sam sarrha]

41. you poor bastard... you are Fuck'n broken, just go back ti the circle jerk at the FreeRepublic, n be

happy..

[stuart68]

42. Thanks for making my point

about kill the non-believers. Only took a couple replies to get there.

[sam sarrha]

45. Apriori Loop.... it's always the other guy that is wrong.. so be it, go away, you'r boring, ignorant

and annoying... go hang out with the High 5'n White Guys.. Apriori Loop, is an un-informed, inappropriate, ineffective, un-evaluated world view based on someone else's data, who has an agenda.. like it infamous climate change research emails... they were being paid by an oil company to do that.

you will come to the same conclusion where ever anyone inputs information that you disagree with, you are a bigot... why should anyone bother discussing anything with you.. you have a cynical sophomoric talking point... it sounds great to you.. but it has nothing to do with reality. its boring,

I'm a 60 year old research biologist.. look, you think you won the argument.. wrong, there is no argument. you are just uninformed.. no one is killing you. it is just no one wants to play your stupid word game... you are like a kid that learned how to win at Tic Tac Toe, every time. so you come over to where the big boys hang out and you cant figure out why they think your stupid..

it is all about what regions in your brain are dominant, that sets the filter on your world view. you simply are not physically capable of understanding what we are talking about.. until you learn to meditate, and reset the Default program in your "Grey-ware"

it is nothing personal.. we hear your crap all the time. it is very simular to having a religious fanatic try to convert you.. it's really annoying. and a waste of time

[stuart68]

48. I feel bad for you

I'm glad your proud of your clearly dominant intelligence.

You're a 60 year old marine biologist, but clearly not a scientist (with that attitude).

I don't feel I won the argument, just feel like I expressesd an opinion. I am happy that you so quickly proved my point with your rude attack (as opposed to a thoughtful response).

Go ahead, you can have the last shot - you're adding nothing to the debate, so I will end it here. corresponding with you any further is pointless (despite your massive intellect and ego). Have a fantastic day :)

[sam sarrha]

40. this has happened several times.. at the end of the last ice age as the ice cap was melting, the

fresh cold water pooling in the center melted its way out and quickly flowed into the sea about at Hudson Bay.. it interrupted the Thermalcline... the Gulf Stream Stopped.. and set back the end of the Ice AGE 5000 years... until the Thermal cline started up the Gulf Stream again. it's a fact.

you my friend are the anti-scientific jihadist, kill the believers.!! nothing will change your mind because you have had your Dominate regions in your brain altered by the Rethuglican Propaganda.. you are physically incapable of understanding Progressive thought,,

i know you are incapable of understanding why i just wasted as much of my life trying to help you as i did..

good luck

[stuart68]

43. What's with the hostility

I have a different opinion. I do not argue with warming, I do not argue with aggressive conservation, and would stake a bet that I am greener than most people, though not completely.

I just don't get the hostility here and the accusations. Who's up for a little spirited debate. If this forum is agree or get the f out, let me know.

[sam sarrha]

44. AS I SAID.. you make no sense.. you are lost in an Apriori Loop.. bye

[stuart68]

52. the correct term is

"a priori", not "apriori", genius.

If you are going to be condescending, it helps if you actually know how to use the term. Made me laugh, though...

[zulchzulu]

32. One of the main reasons why I explored this info was because...

...when I called my father last Christmas day, he joked about how it was very unseasonably cold where he is and he made a "joke" about Al Gore...

It was Christmas day, so I figured I would just laugh off his comment, but I didn't have a zinger to make him think about what he was saying. I now would have said "Aw shucks, Dad... you're mixing up weather with climate, you silly man..." or something.

I also work with someone who defines himself as a "liberal", yet makes comments where he mixes up weather with climate and jokes about global warming. I think everyone knows someone like this, and hopefully this thread and all its contributions from those responding helps educate and empower people with a succinct, proper response.

[sam sarrha]

51. there are other variables.. but Carbon has run past them like a freight train over a penny on the

tracks... you have an agenda is my point, you are a perfect example of the "Blind Eye of Science"...

[alteredstate]

38. Thanks, zulch!

Haven't been here for a while, and it was great to see this post when I returned!

[lunatica]

53. Thanks. Geography like this should be taught as early as grade school

This is college level and taken as a Science requirement. It should be a grade school and high school requirement. What the young people are taught is what dictates their future activities and businesses. But for some that concept just doesn't occur