Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, October 27, 2016


It’s a good thing I remembered where I stored all my old ski gear, including the thermal underwear that I hadn’t worn in years. I’ve needed it during a season in which even the Deep South has seen an epidemic of frozen pipes, single-digit temperatures and school cancelations without snow. Schoolkids were allowed to stay home for a day or two because, according to administrators, the weather was too doggone cold.

The deep freeze might have forced most of us into a shoulder-hunching slouch, but it prompted an Easter Parade-like promenade by a crew of familiar climate-change skeptics, who trotted out their usual arguments: See, we told you so. They’re making it all up. The planet isn’t getting warmer.

Because the Northeast corridor has suffered through severe winters of late, the backlash has become a ritual. But it’s nothing more than posturing, akin to positing today that the Earth is flat and the sun revolves around it. Climate change is real — a serious threat to the economy, to the food supply, to the ecosystem.

“This time of year, people will take a cold spell and try to say, ‘We told you climate change is not real,'” said Dr. Marshall Shepherd, president of the American Meteorological Society and head of the Atmospheric Sciences Program at the University of Georgia. But, he added, “We’ll still have winter in the year 2080, when the climate is likely to be much warmer.”

Shepherd, a former NASA climate scientist, likes to explain the cold spurts to laymen with the following analogy: “Weather is your mood, but climate is your personality. Just because you’re in a bad mood today doesn’t mean that’s your entire personality.”

On the fact of a warming planet, the scientific consensus is clear: It is. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2013 ties with 2003 as the fourth-warmest year for the planet since records started being kept in 1880. Indeed, 2013 was the 37th consecutive year that global temperatures have been above average. And 9 of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred in this century.

  • Allan Richardson

    If I owned a casino, I would love to have these folks come in and play the slots. As soon as they got one minor jackpot, they would refuse to believe the known odds that favor the house. Their ideology would force them to keep feeding the slot machine because there is “no such thing as a house advantage, because I just got a jackpot of $100 an hour ago.”

  • Mark Forsyth

    It may be a stretch but I would say that climate change denial and racial prejudice are quite similar in that they each require massive amounts of willful ignorance to maintain.

  • howa4x

    When I was young in the 50’s I lived in a area 1200 ft up and we had snow from late November to march. I never remember a time when there wasn’t snow or the lakes weren’t frozen solid. We used to drive cars on them to play night hockey by car light. Now we get a cold period and then it goes up to 45 degrees and everything melts. Most of the lakes don’t even freeze solidly. People down south never had snow. Now Ice storms and snow are in Atlanta, and Texas. This is due to a change in the jet stream brought on by polar cap melting and the climate change is showing up as unpredictability in weather. Even the Joint chiefs of staff consider it a threat to this country. Much more dangerous than terrorism. Only cynical and manipulative people like the Koch bros who are making millions in the petro chemical industry and who fund the tea party are finding cynical scientists that question data for money. People will wake up when they can’t stop it. Just remember the people who question climate change are in the same wing of the GOP that questions evolution.

  • daniel bostdorf

    TO: Editors of National memo and hundreds of other web sites:

    It is global, climate change, not warming. This confusion has to be stopped by the media.

    Global climate change is comprised of warming and cooling…

    Both Terms Have Long Been Used

    The argument “they changed the name” suggests that the term ‘global warming’ was previously the norm, and the widespread use of the term ‘climate change’ is now. However, this is simply untrue. For example, a seminal climate science work is Gilbert Plass’ 1956 study’The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climatic Change’ (which coincidentally estimated the climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide at 3.6°C, not far off from today’s widely accepted most likely value of 3°C). Barrett and Gast published a letter in Science in 1971 entitled simply ‘Climate Change’. The journal ‘Climatic Change’ was created in 1977 (and is still published today). The IPCC was formed in 1988, and of course the ‘CC’ is ‘climate change’, not ‘global warming’. There are many, many other examples of the use of the term ‘climate change’ many decades ago. There is nothing new whatsoever about the usage of the term.”


    So to sum up, although the terms are used interchangeably because they are causally related, ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ refer to different physical phenomena. The term ‘climate change’ has been used frequently in the scientific literature for many decades, and the usage of both terms has increased over the past 40 years. Moreover, since the planet continues to warm, there is no reason to change the terminology. Perhaps the only individual to advocate the change was Frank Luntz, a Republican political strategist and global warming skeptic, who used focus group results to determine that the term ‘climate change’ is less frightening to the general public than ‘global warming’. There is simply no factual basis whatsoever to the myth “they changed the name from global warming to climate change”.”

    more here with specific facts, graphs and thorough explanation..

    • Buford2k11

      then there is the confusion between “global climate change” and weather…we are in for a wild ride brothers and sisters…

  • Jambi

    These are the same people who question SCIENCE period!!

    • FredAppell

      They only believe in science when they can find scientists with zero integrity and pay them enough to lie. If 2 out of 1000 scientists say climate change is a farce, those are the 2 that deniers will agree with every time. It’s very bizarre.

      • Faraday_Cat

        And yet if only 2 out of every 1,000 shootings involve more than 10 people, that’s obvious evidence that mass shootings don’t exist…it’s called hypocrisy…and it’s not bizarre, it’s evil.

        • FredAppell

          That’s a good argument, you should use that the next time there is a mass shooting because as sure as I sit here and type these words, there will be another mass shooting soon. It’s disgusting that we have come to expect it now. What I find just as disgusting is as you so poignantly stated, the GOP are hypocrites.

          The GOP has become the party of deny everything,
          it’s good for business and votes but their skewed ideology gets in the way of one of the governments prime jobs…to protect it’s citizens from threats both foreign and domestic. I’d say Climate Change aptly
          fits that description. You’re right, evil fits quite nicely.

  • photojack53

    For the skeptics here, scientists have ZERO motives to ‘push’ climate change. The facts stand on their own merit, measurements and evidence.
    It IS the GOP that has the EVIL motives to go against ALL of the factual evidence from the scientists. They are sold out to their corporate benefactors who unjustly complain about what are really VITALLY needed regulations to reign in their greed and irresponsibility, period! Democrats are the party of environmental responsibility as stewards of our future, while the Republicans stick their heads firmly in the sand and DENY the evidence plainly seen everywhere and confirmed through meticulous record keeping, accurate satellite monitoring, careful measurements and the best details and predictions that science can produce. The I.P.C.C. Reports contained over 700 peer-reviewed articles from nations around the globe and corroborated through several differing scientific disciplines. I have helped edit and index a peer-reviewed scientific journal and know well the rigors and careful scrutiny that goes on for MONTHS before an article ever sees print.
    The facts AND THE TRENDS already developing DO spell gloom and doom. From superstorm Sandy to the rash of tornadoes in the Midwest, the recent flooding in Colorado and rapidly melting glaciers and ice fields, the sea levels WILL rise, resulting in flooding of coastal lands, and storms WILL become more severe and capricious. It’s already happening and the scientists KNOW WHY! Those I.P.C.C. charts are accurate or even slightly understated. A lot of the recent climate activity and the rates of glacial melting and ice fields disappearance have EXCEEDED their earlier predictions. The GOP IS sold-out to their corporate and big oil contributors. They go against the will of even their own constituents and the rest of America by blatantly denying or bringing false doubt to climate science to cover for their deep pocket donors. Global warming science does NOT dismiss ANY evidence from regular cyclical factors affecting climate change. They have meticulously researched and charted such effects AND know how mankind’s effects have added to or exacerbated climate change. GET REAL, FOLKS!
    Look for who would have motives, why they act like they do and evaluate this situation with the scrutiny and care that it deserves.
    OUR VERY FUTURE IS AT STAKE! To deny this endangers public health and safety.

    • Traxm

      Of course we all know that Climate Change is real, but the scientists do have a huge incentive for it to be so. If it was not true they would lose hundreds of millions of dollars in grant money. And of course Al Gore made over $500,000,000 over Climate Change. There are significant dollars involved.

      • photojack53

        Show me your source where the Nobel Prize-winning Al Gore made that much money from his global climate change actions. Your claim is meaningless without it. Also, scientists studying climate change would get grant money either way, whether their research supports or denies it. There is NO DOUBT among the world’s climate scientists about man’s influence in contributing to climate change. Virtually all the false doubt was seeded by the GOP, who are “protecting” their big corporate donors and dirty oil and coal contrIbutors, WHILE ACTING TREASONOUSLY against American citizens by NOT honoring their oaths of office to protect public health and safety. I DETEST what the GOP has become… sold out to their donors and EVIL party leadership!

  • Three Friends

    Meanwhile, in climate news, record breaking cold in Alaska:

  • exdemo55

    An independent data analyst whose work has been published by Principia Scientific, where scientists deliberate and debate, throwing out predetermined political results in favor of the truth in the data, says the global warming activists are at it again.

    They’re manipulating the data.

    In this case, lowering the historical temperatures for years prior to 2000. Which makes the temperatures after that look like they’ve risen. Which makes it look like global warming.

    “A newly uncovered and monumental calculating error in official U.S. government climate data shows beyond doubt that climate scientists unjustifiably added a whopping one degree of phantom warming to the official ‘raw’ temperature record,” the report says.

    It comes from the discovery by independent data analyst Steven Goddard, who did a study of the official U.S. temperature records used by NASA, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and others.

    He found that for the records, when global temperatures plummeted in 1999, on the official U.S. chart, they didn’t.

    Essentially, he said, the charge was revised downward by one degree for readings before 2000. But they “left post-2000 temperatures more or less intact.”

    “Does this evidence prove an intentional fraud? Goddard certainly thinks it possible,” the science site analysis explains, “and only a full examination of all the files will show that, one way or the other. … The ramifications are that hundreds of billions of tax dollars have been misallocated to ‘solve’ a non-problem, all due to willful malfeasance and/or incompetence in data handling.”

    The analysis continued, “Just last month (December 2013), John Beale, the senior EPA policy adviser, was convicted and jailed for defrauding taxpayers out of $1 million in salaries and expenses. Does a culture of corruption extend through departments associated with climate policy?”

    “Climategate” exposes the global warming scam. Get it now at the WND Superstore.

    At the CATO Institute, a separate report on 2013 temperatures noted, “Please be advised that this history has been repeatedly ‘revised’ to either make temperatures colder in the earlier years or warmer at the end. Not one ‘adjustment’ has the opposite effect, a clear contravention of logic and probability.”

    Columnist Vox Day wrote at Absolute Rights that it’s just another “smoking gun in the fraud-filled field of ‘climate science.’”

    “What Goddard has uncovered is that the U.S. temperature records are being massaged and manipulated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in much the same way that the Bureau of Labor Statistics manipulates the unemployment rate,” he writes.

    “For example, despite the fact that more Americans are out of work than ever before, the BLS has managed to reduce the unemployment rate to 6.7 percent by simply excluding millions of Americans from the labor force. So, even though the employment-population ratio has fallen from 64.7 percent to 58.6 percent, implying 18.9 million more Americans out of work in a country of 310 million people, the official unemployment rate is down from its 2009 highs,” he said.

    “In the same way, NOAA has magically transformed a 90-year cooling tend into a 40-year warming trend by reversing the polarity of its V2 temperature adjustment. … In other words, NOAA artificially lowered temperatures from before the year 2000 by one degree, thereby making all post-2000 temperatures look that much hotter and producing the fictitious ‘warming trend’ that no one who ever goes outside has been able to detect,” he said.

    Goddard’s findings, he wrote, included that “discontinuity” at 1998, because even though temperatures plummeted in 1999-2000, “they didn’t in the U.S. graph.”