Snow Fuels Global Warming Debate

After a week of blizzard conditions that buried some parts of the East Coast under record-breaking amounts of snow, the debate over climate change continues to simmer.

Critics of global warming science gleefully point out their windows to mounting snow drifts, which they see as clear evidence that the idea of man-made climate change is bunk. Advocates insist that unusual weather events signify climate change is already underway. (Ironically, while the East Coast is buried under snow, Vancouver, the home of the 2010 Winter Olympics, has experienced weather so balmy officials have had to bring snow in by helicopter).

The back and forth between skeptics and proponents has become increasingly sardonic.

According to the New York Times, the family of Oklahoma Republican Sen. James M. Inhofe, a leading skeptic, built an igloo on Capitol Hill, dubbing it "Al Gore's New Home."

Inhofe told the Times by e-mail that the snowstorms show that doubts about global warming science - which has been the subject of controversy in recent months - are well founded.

But Joseph Romm, a climate change expert at the Center for American Progress, dismissed the claim, telling the paper that "ideologues in the Senate keep pushing the anti-scientific disinformation that big snowstorms are evidence against human-caused global warming."

Climate scientists maintain that no single weather event can be used by either proponents or critics as justification for their beliefs. But Jeff Masters, a meteorologist who writes for the Weather Underground, notes that government and academic studies point to the increasing frequency of severe weather, according to the Times.

The debate between the two factions will likely last far past the last snows have melted. In the latest bit of news, the University of East Anglia - the university at the center of the most recent climate controversy - says it will conduct a new review of the science published by its Climate Research Unit.

The university says the presitigious Royal Society science academy will help find independent scientists to run the new inquiry.

The Climate Research Unit found itself at the heart of the scandal after claims that scientists there and elsewhere tried to suppress or spin the science of global warming.

Leaked e-mails appeared to show researchers stonewalling climate skeptics and discussing ways to dodge Britain's Freedom of Information laws.

An inquiry led by former government bureaucrat Muir Russell is already investigating, but the university said Thursday that it also wanted an audit of the Climate Research Unit's scientific work.

• Quick Poll

Has the harsh winter in some areas changed your opinion of climate change science?
 Yes
 No

[grpruett]

Why haven't scientists re-examine the where the north and south poles are at? Shift in the poles would change the weather patterns and the loacation of the ice caps.

Also 'the the road to hell is paved with good intentions', so if these changes are natural cycles in the earth, by us trying to stop them, might be our own undoing.

Just a thought I wanted to share

[Noval53]

Forums like this are great for exposing the lies of climate change/global warming and the politics behind it. The zealots of the "climate chaos church" despise non-believers and want all dissenters silenced. The political wing of this MAD science movement will attempt to drive insane government regulatitions; to dictate what you drive, restrict travel, control how much fuel you can use, heavily tax all energy use, and much much more. The UN is clearly driving to gain control of global resources, power, and pick your pocket. Thankfully we are not governed by the UN den of thieves.

[troutfishyman]

by louiville35 February 12, 2010 7:03 PM EST

In A BBC Poll only 26% believe it's man made. "And only 26% of those asked believed climate change was happening and "now established as largely man-made"." BBC 2/7/2010 or in England 7/2/2010



A majority of americans also believe in angels. So I would not suggest that one consult the public on scientific issues. Instead, how about the experts on the subject? Over 90% of climate scientists agree that AGW is factual. hmmmmm

[steeepe]

Who cares what the majority thinks about a scientific issue? The majority of people probably never took more than one science course and don't know anything about hypothesis testing or how science works. The majority can be wrong -- look at the Supreme Court and the "election" of George Bush. Were a majority of Germans pro-Nazi? Are a majority of Arabs anti-Israel? Polls have no relevance to global climate change.

[troutfishyman]

by louiville35 February 12, 2010 7:03 PM EST
Wiki propaganda, don't make me laugh LOL



Not really, simply a listing of the statements and polls in one convenient spot. Be my guest to try and find any errors.

BTY, funny coming from a guy who's only source of information is right wing blogs.

[troutfishyman]

by jimispod February 12, 2010 6:55 PM EST
Godrey Bloom said it best: "Scam, scam, scam!"





Nope, Rahm Emanuel said it best.

[jimispod]

Godrey Bloom said it best: "Scam, scam, scam!"

[troutfishyman]

Here is a great summary of support statements from numerous scientific organizations, and also polling results. If you dare to review, you will see just how stupid your assertion is.

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

[troutfishyman]

by louiville35 February 12, 2010 1:41 PM EST
LOL now in your rants would you at least clarify your comments because like a greasy most greasy zealots they seem to float back and forth about GW/AGW where as overall most believe in GW but the number of those who believe it's man-made is dropping like a stone and most countries that is the minority opinion.



Utterly false ... a complete lie. This is not even an issue in most countries. AGW is clear to most. At this point, those who do not get it frankly do not have the mental capacity for abstract logical thought.

[troutfishyman]

The MAD skeptics need to take some science courses, so they can understand the debate.

[Noval53]

The truth hurts; and the climate change/global warming zealots are having a hard time dealing with "liars exposed" in the UK's Climate Research Unit. Thankfully millions of people are waking up and realizing that the CRU is pushing MAD science for dollars. If you believe politicians at the UN or MAD scientists at the CRU can change the climate, the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale cheap; just for you.

[steeepe]

You have misunderstood the stolen emails. You think you know the truth? What is your expertise? Any advanced training in climate science, physics, or relevant sciences? Sometimes he have to rely on the knowledgeable opinions of experts. I can't critique the latest wave of transistors or the best way to build a bridge. Engineers have a better understanding. What makes you so confident of your opinion about climate change? Have you done any Nobel Prize-winning work on the issue, like Rowland? He thinks that the billions of tons of manmade gases released into the atmosphere have an effect. But you know better? What are your credentials?