Uh-Oh Now Global Warming Causes Robbery, Prostitution, and Drug Abuse

Once again, its time to add to the Official “Stupid Things Used To Fear Monger About Global Warming” List.  The new entry is armed robbery, prostitution, and drug abuse at least in Ghana. Since July 2009 global warming moonbats have blamed each of  the following on global warming, climate change or whatever they decided to call it these days:

Incredible shrinking sheep, Invasion of jellyfish in the Mediterranean, Surge in fatal shark attack, Boy Scout tornado deaths, Global conflict, Beer tasting different, Suicide of farmers in Australia, Bigger tuna fish, longer days, shorter days, Collapse of gingerbread houses in Sweden, Cow infertility, UFO sightings in the UK, Rise in insurance premiums, Heroin addiction, Frigid Cold Winters in Great Britain, Cancer, Death from heart disease, diabetes, stroke, respiratory disease and even accidents, homicide, suicide, water -borne disease outbreaks, heavier, wetter snowstorms treacherous for travel and ambulation, Lyme disease, swarms of allergy-inducing, stinging insects, along with mosquitoes and devastating pine bark beetle infestations and the spread of forest and crop pests, 40,000 dead crabs , unrest in the Middle East. screwed-up love making, the Japanese earthquake-tsunami, horrible rash of tornadoes in southeast United States,The Arab Spring, extended severe allergy seasons, Lyme disease, malaria or dengue fever, trauma, depression, high blood pressure and heart disease,and increased threat of wars, violence and military action against the UK. migration of possibly rabid Vampire bats from Mexico.

According to an article on Modern Ghana.com called Climate Change and Social Impacts, global warming is causing all kinds of bad things. According to the article, global warming is ruining the farms in Ghana especially in the Ashaladja community.

The effects of climate change are increasingly threatening the sustainability of the environment. Evidently, it has provoked very serious and grievous social impacts. For instance, climate change effects have led to deepening unemployment. Ashaladja is a community in Ghana where agriculture which is the key source of livelihood of the inhabitants has been adversely affected the over 5,000 indigenes.

According to the article, climate change has caused floods ruining the Cassava, Yam, Cocoyam, and Plantain crops. Because of the ruined crops many youths have had nothing to do, and as the old saying goes, the idol brain is the devil's playground.

Thus the youth including young women have become jobless and are forced to engage in deviant behaviors such as armed robbery, prostitution, and drug abuse as means of survival.

Again, the influx of young people from the rural to the urban areas as an attempt to escape serious droughts has denied development in those rural areas. Indeed, if the able, talented, energetic and vibrant young people are hurriedly leaving for the city or urban centers, then how can development take place in those communities? This signal is posing a threat to the future of these communities thereby denying the possibility of eradicating poverty. The negative social impact of such development may not be quantified.

Holy Crap!  Prostitution and drugs, and Crime in Ghana just because of global warming. Will that move up to the Northern Hemisphere and the 48 states. After all, we Americans are exhaling CO2 and driving gas guzzlers. All Gore was right! We're all going to die, but who knew it would be from STDs, ODs and getting beaten by crooks . Unless of course this is just a little more global warming fear mongering.

New Report Suggests Warming is NOT Man-Made (And Things Were A Lot Hotter In Medieval Times)

So much for that climate change consensus nonsense. A new report co-produced by three non-profit research groups (Heartland Institute, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, and Science and Environmental Policy Project) casts doubt on on many of the claims of the Al Gore set (the full report is embedded below).

 The major claim in this new report is that most of the warming recorded is a result of natural rather than man made causes. The authors say:

 “We are not saying anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) cannot produce some warming or have not in the past. Our conclusion is that the evidence shows they are not playing a substantial role.”

The report also shows that the famous "medieval period" was a lot warmer than it is today and both the planet and man survived.  The study also concludes that “the net effect of continued warming and rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere is most likely to be beneficial to humans, plants, and wildlife.

The other top-line conclusions are: 

• “We find evidence that the models over-estimate the amount of warming that occurred during the twentieth century and fail to incorporate chemical and biological processes that may be as important as the physical processes employed in the models.”

• “More CO2 promotes more plant growth both on land and throughout the surface waters of the world’s oceans, and this vast assemblage of plant life has the ability to affect Earth’s climate in several ways, almost all of them tending to counteract the heating effects of CO2’s thermal radiative forcing.”

• “The latest research on paleoclimatology and recent temperatures [finds] new evidence that the Medieval Warm Period of approximately 1,000 years ago, when there was about 28 percent less CO2 in the atmosphere than there is currently, was both global and warmer than today’s world.”

• “New research finds less melting of ice in the Arctic, Antarctic, and on mountaintops than previously feared, no sign of acceleration of sea-level rise in recent decades, no trend over the past 50 years in changes to the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (MOC), and no changes in precipitation patterns or river flows that could be attributed to rising CO2 levels.”

• “Amphibians, birds, butterflies, other insects, lizards, mammals, and even worms benefit from global warming and its myriad ecological effects.”

• “Rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations, by increasing crop yields, will play a major role in averting hunger and ecological destruction in the future.”

• “The latest research suggests corals and other forms of aquatic life have effective adaptive responses to climate change enabling them to flourish despite or even because of climate change.”

• “Global warming is more likely to improve rather than harm human health because rising temperatures lead to a greater reduction in winter deaths than the increase they cause in summer deaths.”

• “Even in worst-case scenarios, mankind will be much better off in the year 2100 than it is today, and therefore able to adapt to whatever challenges climate change presents.”

In the end, the report concludes that the climate change nonsense is overblown, not only in regards to the role of man kind but also the effect it will have on the earth and life on the earth.  Sorry Al!

The full executive summary is embedded below.

Front Matter

Warming Scientists On Suicide Watch?-The Global Sea Level is Shrinking

One of the big threats from the global warming moonbat types is that a rise in temperature will melt the polar ice caps causing the oceans to rise, with the cataclysmic result of skyscrapers being under water.  And boy oh boy, if you think that the commute into Manhattan is bad now....just wait.

There is only one problem with this scenario,  Mother Nature isn't being cooperative.  The latest data shows sea level falling during the past year. Of course one year does not make a trend, but the data makes sense of you look at the past century of data.

It is true that sea level has risen during the 20th century and probably well before that.  Scientists estimate that sea level has increased by 7 inches during the 2oth century.

The climate change hoaxers use computer models to predict that sea levels would rise anywhere from 15 inches to 2o feet because of global warming in the 21st century (the consensus number is closer to 3 feet).

But Mother Nature was never good at computer science.  Satellite data proved that the first decade of the 21st century sea level grew by only 0.83 inches (a pace of just 8 inches for the entire century). What's even worse (for the global warming hoaxers) there has been no rise since 2006.  Now I know that some Democrats believe that Obama is a miracle worker, but even the the crazies at the Daily Kos would admit that controlling sea level is way above his pay grade. To "fudge" the data they didn't agree with, the scientists at the University of Colorado’s NASA-funded Sea Level Research Group did what any other self-respecting cult members would do, they simply added .3 millimeters per year to its Global Mean Sea Level Time Series. That way they could report that the sea level rise was accelerating, instead of  what was actually happening--decelerating.

Now, new data has been released from NASA comparing the summer of 2011 to that of 2010.

The global sea level this summer is a quarter of an inch lower than last summer, according to NASA scientists, in sharp contrast to the gradual rise the ocean has experienced in recent years.

The change stems from two strong weather cycles over the Pacific Ocean — El Niño and La Niña — which shifted precipitation patterns, according to scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. The two cycles brought heavy rains to Brazil and Amazon, along with drought to the southern United States.

Climate scientist Josh Willis, who also works at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, warned that this water will eventually return to the ocean, and the long-term trend of rising sea levels will continue.

But it will continue to slow down unless the insist on adding their little .3 millimeter fudge.

“What this show is the impact La Niña and El Niño can have on global rainfall,” he said in an interview, adding scientists need to get a better sense of ice sheet dynamics before they can offer a more precise estimate of future sea level rise. “We really have a lot left to understand before we can do better.”

I would agree with that, they have lots to understand, including whether man-made global warming is real or not. Another thing they need to understand is that computer  models are nice, but they are based on biased assumptions.  There is nothing like sticking your finger out the window (or using satellite data) and trying to determine what the real numbers are.

Then again they don't want to do that, because every time they look at the real numbers it proves their computer models wrong.

Man Made Global Warming Another Romney Flip Flop

Once again the media has it all wrong.  They claim that the conservative wing of the GOP has trouble with Mitt Romney because of some of the positions he has taken on the issues.  That's not quite true. Conservative Republicans have an issue with Romney because his positions change so often they're not sure where he stands.

During his two attempts to gain the GOP nomination for president, Mitt Romney has changed his views on abortion, gay rights, and gun control.  According to Reuters he has now added global warming to his little waffle dance.



In early June the former Massachusetts governor turned perpetual presidential candidate announced his support of the man-made global warming hoax.

"I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that," he told a crowd of about 200 at a town hall meeting in Manchester, New Hampshire.

"It's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors."'

When he was Governor of Massachusetts,  Romney also took the opening steps toward joining a cap-and-trade compact for power plants now known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. 

Governor Mitt Romney signaled his support yesterday for a regional agreement among Northeastern states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, despite opposition from power companies and other business interests that have been lobbying the administration against the plan.

In opening remarks to a clean-energy conference in Boston, Romney said the first-of-its-kind agreement, under which Massachusetts and eight other states could be required to cut power plant emissions by 2020, will not hurt the economy, as some have charged. He argued that it would spur businesses to develop clean- and renewable-energy technology to market worldwide.
''This is a great thing for the Commonwealth," Romney said, his strongest endorsement of the pact to date. ''We can effectively create incentives to help stimulate a sector of the economy and at the same time not kill jobs."

He later went on to say:

Romney said Monday that he had some concerns about the agreement, known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, but he endorsed this and other clean-energy initiatives by saying they would stimulate the development of technology that Massachusetts companies could sell to other states and countries as the emphasis on climate change grows.

“I’m convinced it is good business,” Romney said. He cited analyses showing that the agreement would boost energy prices by just 1 or 2 percent.

 His comments in June seemed to indicate his continued support of the Climate change myth. But yesterday he tweaked his support a bit.

"Do I think the world's getting hotter? Yeah, I don't know that but I think that it is," he said. "I don't know if it's mostly caused by humans."

"What I'm not willing to do is spend trillions of dollars on something I don't know the answer to."

Not willing to spend trillions? But on June 3 he said:

  "It's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors."'

 That's the Romney problem. He doesn't have stances on issues, its more like a political game of whack-a-mole, when you try to hit him on an issue he ducks his  head and pops up in a different stance.

Romney's global warming waffle can be added to this list of changed stances.

• Abortion. In October 2002, campaigning for governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney said he would "preserve and protect" a woman's right to choose. He now describes himself as pro-life.

• Gun control. Campaigning for the Senate in 1994, he said he favored strong gun laws and did not "line up with the NRA." He joined the National Rifle Association in 2006 while pondering a presidential run, and he praised the group for "doing good things" and "supporting the right to bear arms."

• Campaign finance. In 1994, he advocated a spending limit on congressional elections and the abolition of political action committees. In 2002, he supported public financing of campaigns from a 10 percent tax on private fundraising. In 2008, he said the McCain-Feingold law limiting campaign contributions is an attack on free speech.

• Immigration. In a November 2005 interview with the Boston Globe, he described an immigration overhaul advanced by John McCain as "reasonable." When he was running against McCain for the nomination in 2008 he denounced  it as an "amnesty plan.

I am not a big fan of the "circular firing squad" and will vote for Romney against Obama if he gets the nomination, but he is killing himself with these constant flip flops. And in the end, his wavering stances on so many issues may turn out to cost him the nomination more than the issues he remains steadfast about.

Uh-Oh Is Global Warming Causing Mosquitoes To Move To Florida?

Once again, its time to add to the Official “Stupid Things Used To Fear Monger About Global Warming” List.  The new entry is plants and animals are migrating to the north. Cluttering the northern slope of Alaska for example. But it's not just Alaska,  Many animal species are now living  north of where they used to. For example one type of mosquito has migrated to Florida (no its not a species of retired Jewish mosquitoes). So the migration of animals can no be added to the official list.

Since July 2009 global warming moonbats have blamed each of  the following on global warming, climate change or whatever they decided to call it these days:

Incredible shrinking sheep, Invasion of jellyfish in the Mediterranean, Surge in fatal shark attack, Boy Scout tornado deaths, Global conflict, Beer tasting different, Suicide of farmers in Australia, Bigger tuna fish, longer days, shorter days, Collapse of gingerbread houses in Sweden, Cow infertility, UFO sightings in the UK, Rise in insurance premiums, Heroin addiction, Frigid Cold Winters in Great Britain, Cancer, Death from heart disease, diabetes, stroke, respiratory disease and even accidents, homicide, suicide, water -borne disease outbreaks, heavier, wetter snowstorms treacherous for travel and ambulation, Lyme disease, swarms of allergy-inducing, stinging insects, along with mosquitoes and devastating pine bark beetle infestations and the spread of forest and crop pests, 40,000 dead crabs , unrest in the Middle East. screwed-up love making, the Japanese earthquake-tsunami, horrible rash of tornadoes in southeast United States,The Arab Spring, extended severe allergy seasons, Lyme disease, malaria or dengue fever, trauma, depression, high blood pressure and heart disease,and increased threat of wars, violence,  military action against the UK and Vampire Bats

According to a new study led by conservation biologist Chris D. Thomas of the University of York (England), not only are animals moving north, but the fact that they are moving because of global warming is now an established scientific fact. Along with their northern expansion animals are moving to higher elevations to cool off.

Thomas, told the  Washington Post 

“This more or less puts to bed the issue of whether these shifts are related to climate change. There isn’t any obvious alternative explanation for why species should be moving poleward in studies around the world.”

Translating that from the scientific jargon, Thomas is saying

"since conservation is my specialty, and I can't think of any other explanation, I am going to blame the migration on global warming. There that settles it!

Thomas'  new analysis  used data from over 50 papers and included altitude data on 23 plant and animal groups and latitude data from 31 groups.

Despite expected variations in such shifts from species to species, the study revealed a clear trend: uphill migration, on average, was 36 feet per decade (11.0 meters)  and migration away from the equator was 10 miles (16.9 km) per decade. These rates of migration are 2 to 3 times grater than findings from the last major migration study, conducted in 2003, indicting a likely acceleration trend.

According to the report As temperatures rise, these species’ survival often depends upon moving to cooler locales, such as higher-up mountain slopes. This of course, brings the migrating species into contact with the already established (in that niche) species. This can result in co-existence (a new, stable ecological web), or a reshuffling of the web. Amongst similar species (such as moths and birds), the result is often increased competition over food sources and/or the up-slope-migrating species driving out the previously established one.

In some cases, such as with certain species of butterfly in the Sierra Nevada mountains, the pushed-out species has nowhere to move to, and its existence becomes imperiled. Another example of accelerating migration is the North American pika (a mountain-dwelling rodent) which has shown a ten-fold increase in its up-slope migration (per decade) just in the past 20 years or so.

What is not discernible, is if the study took into account the encroachment of human habitats on the animal Eco-systems or the natural increased heat from man's development of land, not global warming but for example, if you were to build a home in a desolate area and that home was heated, the area in the vicinity of that house would be warmer.  Now make that home a village, small city or megalopolis and imagine the increased heat.

As an example, the return of dengue fever carrying mosquitoes to Key West Florida in 2009 — after an absence of more than 75 years — has been blamed on warming-induced insect migration.

 An explanation just as viable as the one coming from the alarmists would be that baby-boomer mosquitoes all became 55 at approximately the same time and are slowly migrating to Miami were they can feast on old Jews who are feasting on early bird specials.

The migrating theory is typical of the climate change hoaxers.  They selected old research that didn't give them the answer they wanted, asked only the questions that would prove their hypothesis and "presto-chango" the science is settled.

 The problem is the rest of us have to pick up the pieces from their half-assed research.

But now comes evidence from the largest-scale analysis to date that such northward, migratory expansions and accelerating movements up-slope (i.e., to cooler/higher elevations) are largely attributable to warming and climate forcings.
The study, led by conservation biologist Chris D. Thomas of the University of York (England),   “puts to bed” the question of whether these shifts in flora and fauna ranges and altitudes are due to climate change. According to Thomas, as quoted in a recent Washington Post article (see link below), “There isn’t any obvious alternative explanation for why species should be moving poleward in studies around the world.”
The new meta-analysis incorporated data from over 50 papers and included altitude data on 23 plant and animal groups and latitude data (i.e., range shifts northward) from 31 groups. One of the more general findings of the study, which analyzed species migrations in Europe, North America, Chile and Malaysia, was that greater warming in any given region was strongly correlated to farther, northward migration (to cooler climes).

American Pika (Ochotona princeps) is migrating up-slope ten times faster than in did in the 1990's

Despite expected variations in such shifts from species to species, the study revealed a clear trend: uphill migration, on average, was 36 feet per decade (11.0 meters)  and migration away from the equator was 10 miles (16.9 km) per decade. These rates of migration are 2 to 3 times grater than findings from the last major migration study, conducted in 2003, indicting a likely acceleration trend.
While some plant and animal species thrive in warming temperatures (which can open new zones to colonize), many plant and animal species are adapted to ecological niches that fall within a relatively narrow temperature range. As temperatures rise, these species’ survival often depends upon moving to cooler locales, such as higher-up mountain slopes. This of course, brings the migrating species into contact with the already established (in that niche) species. This can result in co-existence (a new, stable ecological web), or a reshuffling of the web. Amongst similar species (such as moths and birds), the result is often increased competition over food sources and/or the up-slope-migrating species driving out the previously established one.
In some cases, such as with certain species of butterfly in the Sierra Nevada mountains, the pushed-out species has nowhere to move to, and its existence becomes imperiled. Another example of accelerating migration is the North American pika (a mountain-dwelling rodent) which has shown a ten-fold increase in its up-slope migration (per decade) just in the past 20 years or so.
The researchers also note the variation in migratory ranges between individual species  and suggest that multiple factors may be at work in these responses.
Quoting from the paper’s abstract:

“The distances moved by species are greatest in studies showing the highest levels of warming [emphasis added] with average latitudinal shifts being generally sufficient to track temperature changes. However, individual species vary greatly in their rates of change, suggesting that the range shift of each species depends on multiple internal species traits and external drivers of change. Rapid average shifts derive from a wide diversity of responses by individual species. “

The researchers also sought to determine how far a given species of plant or animal in a given region had to migrate in order to find the same or cooler temperature. Surprisingly, the average distance turned out to be  between 50 and 60 km to attain a 0.5° C cooler temp, which is considered quite fast considering that often these regions are populated by humans. More surprisingly, there was no difference in movement rate noted across taxonomic groups; plants and insects move equally fast, and birds and mammals move equally fast.

The Cirl Bunting (Emberiza cirlus) is moving into warmer regions, a more flexible response to climate change.

Exceptions do exist; some bird species, like the Cirl bunting, actually have  migrated to warmer regions, proving that at least a few animal species are more flexible in their adaptive responses to changing climate conditions.
One other puzzling outcome of this meta-analysis was a slower late of migration up-slope than was anticipated. Since one need migrate a shorter distance up-slope in order to encounter cooler temperatures (about 100 meters for a 0.5° C  drop), it was theorized that higher elevation movements would occur faster. Their findings did not support this hypothesis. One explanation is that the given animal population is in fact moving laterally on the mountain face, possibly being squeezed by higher-up species and/or to achieve a more northerly-facing direction (which receives less sunlight).
Many biologist are concerned that some species will not be able to move (adapt) quickly enough, or simply run out of room to migrate to. The ultimate effects of this ecological reshuffling are unknown and still a mater of intense study.
And, there is an additional threat here to human health: the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control have issued warnings in the past that pathogen carrying insects (such as mosquitoes carrying malaria, dengue fever, etc.) will also expand their ranges in response to steady, global warming.

The mosquito Aedes aegypti feeding off a human host. Warming temperatures could mean that mosquito born diseases like malaria and dengue fever may become more common in more northerly regions.

As an example, the return of dengue fever carrying mosquitoes to Key West Florida in 2009 — after an absence of more than 75 years — has been blamed on warming-induced insect migration.
The study, Rapid Range Shifts of Species Associated with High Levels of Climate Warming (Chen et al) was published in the August 19 edition of the journal Science.

Some source material for this post came from the Washington Post article: Plants and animals migrating upward as climate change by Brian Vastag, and, the Science Now article In Warming World, Critters Run to the Hills by Sara Reardon.
Top photo: (Parnassian Butterfly) Heather Dwyer / UC Davis
Second photo: (American pika) Justin.Johnsen; CC – By -SA 3.0
Third photo: (Cirl b

Source: Planetsave (http://s.tt/135WO)

But now comes evidence from the largest-scale analysis to date that such northward, migratory expansions and accelerating movements up-slope (i.e., to cooler/higher elevations) are largely attributable to warming and climate forcings.
The study, led by conservation biologist Chris D. Thomas of the University of York (England),   “puts to bed” the question of whether these shifts in flora and fauna ranges and altitudes are due to climate change. According to Thomas, as quoted in a recent Washington Post article (see link below), “There isn’t any obvious alternative explanation for why species should be moving poleward in studies around the world.”
The new meta-analysis incorporated data from over 50 papers and included altitude data on 23 plant and animal groups and latitude data (i.e., range shifts northward) from 31 groups. One of the more general findings of the study, which analyzed species migrations in Europe, North America, Chile and Malaysia, was that greater warming in any given region was strongly correlated to farther, northward migration (to cooler climes).

American Pika (Ochotona princeps) is migrating up-slope ten times faster than in did in the 1990's

Despite expected variations in such shifts from species to species, the study revealed a clear trend: uphill migration, on average, was 36 feet per decade (11.0 meters)  and migration away from the equator was 10 miles (16.9 km) per decade. These rates of migration are 2 to 3 times grater than findings from the last major migration study, conducted in 2003, indicting a likely acceleration trend.
While some plant and animal species thrive in warming temperatures (which can open new zones to colonize), many plant and animal species are adapted to ecological niches that fall within a relatively narrow temperature range. As temperatures rise, these species’ survival often depends upon moving to cooler locales, such as higher-up mountain slopes. This of course, brings the migrating species into contact with the already established (in that niche) species. This can result in co-existence (a new, stable ecological web), or a reshuffling of the web. Amongst similar species (such as moths and birds), the result is often increased competition over food sources and/or the up-slope-migrating species driving out the previously established one.
In some cases, such as with certain species of butterfly in the Sierra Nevada mountains, the pushed-out species has nowhere to move to, and its existence becomes imperiled. Another example of accelerating migration is the North American pika (a mountain-dwelling rodent) which has shown a ten-fold increase in its up-slope migration (per decade) just in the past 20 years or so.
The researchers also note the variation in migratory ranges between individual species  and suggest that multiple factors may be at work in these responses.
Quoting from the paper’s abstract:

“The distances moved by species are greatest in studies showing the highest levels of warming [emphasis added] with average latitudinal shifts being generally sufficient to track temperature changes. However, individual species vary greatly in their rates of change, suggesting that the range shift of each species depends on multiple internal species traits and external drivers of change. Rapid average shifts derive from a wide diversity of responses by individual species. “

The researchers also sought to determine how far a given species of plant or animal in a given region had to migrate in order to find the same or cooler temperature. Surprisingly, the average distance turned out to be  between 50 and 60 km to attain a 0.5° C cooler temp, which is considered quite fast considering that often these regions are populated by humans. More surprisingly, there was no difference in movement rate noted across taxonomic groups; plants and insects move equally fast, and birds and mammals move equally fast.

The Cirl Bunting (Emberiza cirlus) is moving into warmer regions, a more flexible response to climate change.

Exceptions do exist; some bird species, like the Cirl bunting, actually have  migrated to warmer regions, proving that at least a few animal species are more flexible in their adaptive responses to changing climate conditions.
One other puzzling outcome of this meta-analysis was a slower late of migration up-slope than was anticipated. Since one need migrate a shorter distance up-slope in order to encounter cooler temperatures (about 100 meters for a 0.5° C  drop), it was theorized that higher elevation movements would occur faster. Their findings did not support this hypothesis. One explanation is that the given animal population is in fact moving laterally on the mountain face, possibly being squeezed by higher-up species and/or to achieve a more northerly-facing direction (which receives less sunlight).
Many biologist are concerned that some species will not be able to move (adapt) quickly enough, or simply run out of room to migrate to. The ultimate effects of this ecological reshuffling are unknown and still a mater of intense study.
And, there is an additional threat here to human health: the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control have issued warnings in the past that pathogen carrying insects (such as mosquitoes carrying malaria, dengue fever, etc.) will also expand their ranges in response to steady, global warming.

The mosquito Aedes aegypti feeding off a human host. Warming temperatures could mean that mosquito born diseases like malaria and dengue fever may become more common in more northerly regions.

As an example, the return of dengue fever carrying mosquitoes to Key West Florida in 2009 — after an absence of more than 75 years — has been blamed on warming-induced insect migration.
The study, Rapid Range Shifts of Species Associated with High Levels of Climate Warming (Chen et al) was published in the August 19 edition of the journal Science.

Some source material for this post came from the Washington Post article: Plants and animals migrating upward as climate change by Brian Vastag, and, the Science Now article In Warming World, Critters Run to the Hills by Sara Reardon.
Top photo: (Parnassian Butterfly) Heather Dwyer / UC Davis
Second photo: (American pika) Justin.Johnsen; CC – By -SA 3.0
Third photo: (Cirl b

Source: Planetsave (http://s.tt/135WO

All over the warming globe, plant and animal species are moving up…northward and to higher elevations, that is…in order to find cooler temperatures. Evidence from the largest-scale migration study ever conducted shows that this trend is accelerating.

The Clodius Parnassian butterfly is more common at the top of its elevation range in the California mountains than in the past. Such insects are known as 'harbinger' or 'indicator' species because thay are typically the first to respond to climate changes.

Previous studies of plant and animal migrations have offered indications that something — perhaps rising temperatures — was driving species northward and/or to higher altitudes. But these studies were isolated and doubts remained as to the true trigger of these movements and migrations.
But now comes evidence from the largest-scale analysis to date that such northward, migratory expansions and accelerating movements up-slope (i.e., to cooler/higher elevations) are largely attributable to warming and climate forcings.
The study, led by conservation biologist Chris D. Thomas of the University of York (England),   “puts to bed” the question of whether these shifts in flora and fauna ranges and altitudes are due to climate change. According to Thomas, as quoted in a recent Washington Post article (see link below), “There isn’t any obvious alternative explanation for why species should be moving poleward in studies around the world.”
The new meta-analysis incorporated data from over 50 papers and included altitude data on 23 plant and animal groups and latitude data (i.e., range shifts northward) from 31 groups. One of the more general findings of the study, which analyzed species migrations in Europe, North America, Chile and Malaysia, was that greater warming in any given region was strongly correlated to farther, northward migration (to cooler climes).

American Pika (Ochotona princeps) is migrating up-slope ten times faster than in did in the 1990's

Despite expected variations in such shifts from species to species, the study revealed a clear trend: uphill migration, on average, was 36 feet per decade (11.0 meters)  and migration away from the equator was 10 miles (16.9 km) per decade. These rates of migration are 2 to 3 times grater than findings from the last major migration study, conducted in 2003, indicting a likely acceleration trend.
While some plant and animal species thrive in warming temperatures (which can open new zones to colonize), many plant and animal species are adapted to ecological niches that fall within a relatively narrow temperature range. As temperatures rise, these species’ survival often depends upon moving to cooler locales, such as higher-up mountain slopes. This of course, brings the migrating species into contact with the already established (in that niche) species. This can result in co-existence (a new, stable ecological web), or a reshuffling of the web. Amongst similar species (such as moths and birds), the result is often increased competition over food sources and/or the up-slope-migrating species driving out the previously established one.
In some cases, such as with certain species of butterfly in the Sierra Nevada mountains, the pushed-out species has nowhere to move to, and its existence becomes imperiled. Another example of accelerating migration is the North American pika (a mountain-dwelling rodent) which has shown a ten-fold increase in its up-slope migration (per decade) just in the past 20 years or so.
The researchers also note the variation in migratory ranges between individual species  and suggest that multiple factors may be at work in these responses.
Quoting from the paper’s abstract:

“The distances moved by species are greatest in studies showing the highest levels of warming [emphasis added] with average latitudinal shifts being generally sufficient to track temperature changes. However, individual species vary greatly in their rates of change, suggesting that the range shift of each species depends on multiple internal species traits and external drivers of change. Rapid average shifts derive from a wide diversity of responses by individual species. “

The researchers also sought to determine how far a given species of plant or animal in a given region had to migrate in order to find the same or cooler temperature. Surprisingly, the average distance turned out to be  between 50 and 60 km to attain a 0.5° C cooler temp, which is considered quite fast considering that often these regions are populated by humans. More surprisingly, there was no difference in movement rate noted across taxonomic groups; plants and insects move equally fast, and birds and mammals move equally fast.

The Cirl Bunting (Emberiza cirlus) is moving into warmer regions, a more flexible response to climate change.

Exceptions do exist; some bird species, like the Cirl bunting, actually have  migrated to warmer regions, proving that at least a few animal species are more flexible in their adaptive responses to changing climate conditions.
One other puzzling outcome of this meta-analysis was a slower late of migration up-slope than was anticipated. Since one need migrate a shorter distance up-slope in order to encounter cooler temperatures (about 100 meters for a 0.5° C  drop), it was theorized that higher elevation movements would occur faster. Their findings did not support this hypothesis. One explanation is that the given animal population is in fact moving laterally on the mountain face, possibly being squeezed by higher-up species and/or to achieve a more northerly-facing direction (which receives less sunlight).
Many biologist are concerned that some species will not be able to move (adapt) quickly enough, or simply run out of room to migrate to. The ultimate effects of this ecological reshuffling are unknown and still a mater of intense study.
And, there is an additional threat here to human health: the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control have issued warnings in the past that pathogen carrying insects (such as mosquitoes carrying malaria, dengue fever, etc.) will also expand their ranges in response to steady, global warming.

The mosquito Aedes aegypti feeding off a human host. Warming temperatures could mean that mosquito born diseases like malaria and dengue fever may become more common in more northerly regions.

As an example, the return of dengue fever carrying mosquitoes to Key West Florida in 2009 — after an absence of more than 75 years — has been blamed on warming-induced insect migration.
The study, Rapid Range Shifts of Species Associated with High Levels of Climate Warming (Chen et al) was published in the August 19 edition of the journal Science.

Some source material for this post came from the Washington Post article: Plants and animals migrating upward as climate change by Brian Vastag, and, the Science Now article In Warming World, Critters Run to the Hills by Sara Reardon.
Top photo: (Parnassian Butterfly) Heather Dwyer / UC Davis
Second photo: (American pika) Justin.Johnsen; CC – By -SA 3.0
Third photo: (Cirl bunting) Paco Gómez from Castellón, Spain; CC – By – SA 3.0

Source: Planetsave (http://s.tt/135WO)

All over the warming globe, plant and animal species are moving up…northward and to higher elevations, that is…in order to find cooler temperatures. Evidence from the largest-scale migration study ever conducted shows that this trend is accelerating.

The Clodius Parnassian butterfly is more common at the top of its elevation range in the California mountains than in the past. Such insects are known as 'harbinger' or 'indicator' species because thay are typically the first to respond to climate changes.

Previous studies of plant and animal migrations have offered indications that something — perhaps rising temperatures — was driving species northward and/or to higher altitudes. But these studies were isolated and doubts remained as to the true trigger of these movements and migrations.
But now comes evidence from the largest-scale analysis to date that such northward, migratory expansions and accelerating movements up-slope (i.e., to cooler/higher elevations) are largely attributable to warming and climate forcings.
The study, led by conservation biologist Chris D. Thomas of the University of York (England),   “puts to bed” the question of whether these shifts in flora and fauna ranges and altitudes are due to climate change. According to Thomas, as quoted in a recent Washington Post article (see link below), “There isn’t any obvious alternative explanation for why species should be moving poleward in studies around the world.”
The new meta-analysis incorporated data from over 50 papers and included altitude data on 23 plant and animal groups and latitude data (i.e., range shifts northward) from 31 groups. One of the more general findings of the study, which analyzed species migrations in Europe, North America, Chile and Malaysia, was that greater warming in any given region was strongly correlated to farther, northward migration (to cooler climes).

American Pika (Ochotona princeps) is migrating up-slope ten times faster than in did in the 1990's

Despite expected variations in such shifts from species to species, the study revealed a clear trend: uphill migration, on average, was 36 feet per decade (11.0 meters)  and migration away from the equator was 10 miles (16.9 km) per decade. These rates of migration are 2 to 3 times grater than findings from the last major migration study, conducted in 2003, indicting a likely acceleration trend.
While some plant and animal species thrive in warming temperatures (which can open new zones to colonize), many plant and animal species are adapted to ecological niches that fall within a relatively narrow temperature range. As temperatures rise, these species’ survival often depends upon moving to cooler locales, such as higher-up mountain slopes. This of course, brings the migrating species into contact with the already established (in that niche) species. This can result in co-existence (a new, stable ecological web), or a reshuffling of the web. Amongst similar species (such as moths and birds), the result is often increased competition over food sources and/or the up-slope-migrating species driving out the previously established one.
In some cases, such as with certain species of butterfly in the Sierra Nevada mountains, the pushed-out species has nowhere to move to, and its existence becomes imperiled. Another example of accelerating migration is the North American pika (a mountain-dwelling rodent) which has shown a ten-fold increase in its up-slope migration (per decade) just in the past 20 years or so.
The researchers also note the variation in migratory ranges between individual species  and suggest that multiple factors may be at work in these responses.
Quoting from the paper’s abstract:

“The distances moved by species are greatest in studies showing the highest levels of warming [emphasis added] with average latitudinal shifts being generally sufficient to track temperature changes. However, individual species vary greatly in their rates of change, suggesting that the range shift of each species depends on multiple internal species traits and external drivers of change. Rapid average shifts derive from a wide diversity of responses by individual species. “

The researchers also sought to determine how far a given species of plant or animal in a given region had to migrate in order to find the same or cooler temperature. Surprisingly, the average distance turned out to be  between 50 and 60 km to attain a 0.5° C cooler temp, which is considered quite fast considering that often these regions are populated by humans. More surprisingly, there was no difference in movement rate noted across taxonomic groups; plants and insects move equally fast, and birds and mammals move equally fast.

The Cirl Bunting (Emberiza cirlus) is moving into warmer regions, a more flexible response to climate change.

Exceptions do exist; some bird species, like the Cirl bunting, actually have  migrated to warmer regions, proving that at least a few animal species are more flexible in their adaptive responses to changing climate conditions.
One other puzzling outcome of this meta-analysis was a slower late of migration up-slope than was anticipated. Since one need migrate a shorter distance up-slope in order to encounter cooler temperatures (about 100 meters for a 0.5° C  drop), it was theorized that higher elevation movements would occur faster. Their findings did not support this hypothesis. One explanation is that the given animal population is in fact moving laterally on the mountain face, possibly being squeezed by higher-up species and/or to achieve a more northerly-facing direction (which receives less sunlight).
Many biologist are concerned that some species will not be able to move (adapt) quickly enough, or simply run out of room to migrate to. The ultimate effects of this ecological reshuffling are unknown and still a mater of intense study.
And, there is an additional threat here to human health: the World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control have issued warnings in the past that pathogen carrying insects (such as mosquitoes carrying malaria, dengue fever, etc.) will also expand their ranges in response to steady, global warming.

The mosquito Aedes aegypti feeding off a human host. Warming temperatures could mean that mosquito born diseases like malaria and dengue fever may become more common in more northerly regions.

As an example, the return of dengue fever carrying mosquitoes to Key West Florida in 2009 — after an absence of more than 75 years — has been blamed on warming-induced insect migration.
The study, Rapid Range Shifts of Species Associated with High Levels of Climate Warming (Chen et al) was published in the August 19 edition of the journal Science.

Some source material for this post came from the Washington Post article: Plants and animals migrating upward as climate change by Brian Vastag, and, the Science Now article In Warming World, Critters Run to the Hills by Sara Reardon.
Top photo: (Parnassian Butterfly) Heather Dwyer / UC Davis
Second photo: (American pika) Justin.Johnsen; CC – By -SA 3.0
Third photo: (Cirl bunting) Paco Gómez from Castellón, Spain; CC – By – SA 3.0

Source: Planetsave (http://s.tt/135WO)

PROVEN! Congressman Gary Ackerman Has Proof That Global Warming is REAL!

Whew! That solves that. The debate is now over.  Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-NY) has proved that Global Warming is real! During a meeting of the House Foreign Affairs committee the Long Island liberal launched into a speech blasting the de-funding of the  global climate change initiative. Apparently the majority of the committee feel that man-made global warming is not real, citing the wealth of information such as the fact that temperatures have actually gone down in recent years, the fact that the famous hockey stick has been proven to be bogus, and the fact that during the medieval period, long before the industrial revolution temperatures were higher than they are today.

But that doesn't deter Ackerman, as you can see in the video below, he has proof that global warming is real, when he goes outside his glasses fog up, with the thousands of scientists working on the climate change issue why didn't they thing of that incredible test?

(if you cannot see video below click here)




Of course there is one flaw in Ackerman's new Global climate change theory, his glasses could also be fogging up because his head is usually deep up the President's arse.

Climate Change Hoaxers Add to The Official “Stupid Things Used To Fear Monger About Global Warming” List

Once again, its time to add to the Official “Stupid Things Used To Fear Monger About Global Warming” List. During the past two and a half years, global warming moonbats have blamed each of  the following on global warming, climate change or whatever they decided to call it these days:

Incredible shrinking sheep, Invasion of jellyfish in the Mediterranean, Surge in fatal shark attack, Boy Scout tornado deaths, Global conflict, Beer tasting different, Suicide of farmers in Australia, Bigger tuna fish, longer days, shorter days, Collapse of gingerbread houses in Sweden, Cow infertility, UFO sightings in the UK, Rise in insurance premiums, Heroin addiction, Frigid Cold Winters in Great Britain, Cancer, Death from heart disease, diabetes, stroke, respiratory disease and even accidents, homicide, suicide, water -borne disease outbreaks, heavier, wetter snowstorms treacherous for travel and ambulation, Lyme disease, swarms of allergy-inducing, stinging insects, along with mosquitoes and devastating pine bark beetle infestations and the spread of forest and crop pests, 40,000 dead crabs , unrest in the Middle East. screwed-up love making, the Japanese earthquake-tsunami, horrible rash of tornadoes in southeast United States,The Arab Spring, extended severe allergy seasons, Lyme disease, malaria or dengue fever, trauma, depression, high blood pressure and heart disease

The latest recipient of the merit award for excellence in climate fear mongering is Chris Huhne, the British Climate Change Secretary. Today, Huhne is speaking before a group of national defense experts and telling them that climate change may cause an increased threat of wars, violence and military action against the UK, and risks reversing the progress of civilization. Wow that sounds like wrath of God-type stuff!

"Climate change is a threat multiplier. It will make unstable states more unstable, poor nations poorer, inequality more pronounced, and conflict more likely," Huhne is expected to say in a speech to defence experts. "And the areas of most geopolitical risk are also most at risk of climate change."

He will warn that climate change risks reversing the progress made in prosperity and democracy since the industrial revolution, arguing that the results of global warming could lead to a return to a "Hobbesian" world in which life is "nasty, brutish and short."

We don't really need climate change to shorten our lives, we have Obamacare.

The interesting part of that statement is if anything is "Hobbesian" it is the climate change hoaxer movement.' According to political philosopher Thomas Hobbes, society is a population beneath a sovereign authority, to whom all individuals in that society cede some rights for the sake of protection. Any abuses of power by this authority are to be accepted as the price of peace. There is no doctrine of separation of powers in Hobbes' discussion, nor is there any dissent of opinion. According to Hobbes, the ruler must control civil, military, judicial and religious powers.

The climate change hoaxers believe that they are like the sovereign, civil, military , judicial, religious and economic powers must submit to their man-made climate change agenda. 

Huhne believes the UK and other countries must act urgently to prepare for the threat. "We cannot be 100% sure that our enemies will attack our country, but we do not hesitate to prepare for the eventuality," he plans to say. "The same principle applies to climate change, which a report published by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has identified as one of the four critical issues that will affect everyone on the planet over the next 30 years."

His comparison of climate change and terrorism echoes Sir David King, the former chief scientific adviser to the government who warned in 2004 that global warning posed "a bigger threat than terrorism".

Well lets see---all the major global warming predictions, no more ice caps, New York buried under a wall of water, the elimination of Cookies and Cream Ice Cream etc., have been proven false.  Sadly the Islamist terrorist movement that is blowing up civilians throughout the world is proven true every day.  Sorry Dave, your comparison shows you to be a pawn instead of a King.

Huhne has scored key victories in recent months in his attempts to put climate change at the centre of coalition policy. He helped to persuade Cameron to accept the "fourth carbon budget" - a plan that would see the UK halve emissions by 2025, the stiffest target of any developed country. Yesterday the prime minister announced tough new energy efficiency standards, supported by Huhne, that would require central government to cut emissions by 25% in the five-year term of this parliament.

For his hard work in trying to prove a hoax through fear mongering we present Chris Huhne, the British Climate Change Secretary with the following Certificate of Merit which reads in part:

This certifies that Chris Huhne:

UK Climate Secretary Has Demonstrated

Excellence in Climate Fear Mongering 

AWARD OF MERIT Given this Seventh day of July 2011

Signed 

Al Gore's Chakra

Related articles

• Latest Climate Stupidity: Fossil Fuel Air Pollution Has Slowed Down Warming

Latest Climate Stupidity: Fossil Fuel Air Pollution Has Slowed Down Warming

When pushed, these climate change moonbats can sure be creative. But the latest example is totally amazing.  Warmists were were asked why the earth did not warm for the ten year period from 1998 to 2008. After years of research they figured out an answer. Fossil fuels, specifically coal has been preventing the earth from warming.

Now I know what you are thinking, didn't they say that it was fossil fuels like coal caused global warming?  They sure did, that's what makes this claim so creative.

The lull in global warming from 1998 to 2008 was mainly caused by a sharp rise in China's coal use, a study suggests.

The absence of a temperature rise over that decade is often used by "climate sceptics" as grounds for denying the existence of man-made global warming.

But the new study, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, concludes that smog from the extra coal acted to mask greenhouse warming.

China's coal use doubled 2002-2007, according to US government figures.

Although burning the coal produced more warming carbon dioxide, it also put more tiny sulphate aerosol particles into the atmosphere which cool the planet by reflecting solar energy back into space.

The Lead researcher Robert Kaufmann from Boston University, says it was Fox News who pushed him to come up with this unique solution:

"Two years ago, I gave a talk to a general audience in New Jersey about climate change," he told BBC News.

"And an older gentleman asked me 'why should I believe in this climate change - I was watching Fox News and they said the Earth's temperature hasn't changed in 10 years and has actually gone down'.

"At that stage I wasn't paying much attention to climate change - I'd returned to working on oil markets - so I went back and checked the data and found that was just about right."Mainstream answers

Even before this paper there wasn't much scientific evidence for denying climate change, and now I don't see any credible scientific contradiction”

No contradiction? Allow me to restate their case.  The reason there is no global warming is the air pollution caused by coal which causes global warming.  Got it?  I didn't think so.



Truth is these climate change hoaxers must have a very low opinion of the world population.  If they really believe coal is slowing  down "global warming" then why aren't they calling for us to switch to an all coal economy?

What is really going on here is these hoaxers are really trying to point us toward a global re-distribution of income. The fact that holes keep popping up in their research causes them to come up with new and more desperate excuses for their theory's failings.  This Coal theory is a perfect example.

Scientists Agree, Salon Is Making Fake Claims To Spread Climate Change Hoax

Whenever there is an unusual weather pattern, members of the Holy Church of Global Warming Moonbats start spreading new scare-tactics. Usually it sounds something like:

This planet is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions. Old Testament real wrath of God type stuff.  Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!  Forty years of Gilligan's Island Re-runs! Earthquakes, volcanoes, another Rocky Movie rising from the grave. Human sacrifice, Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner living together... mass hysteria!

And just as common is the fact that scientists dispute their contention.  It happened when both Time and Newsweek blamed this spring's tornado activity on Global Warming (contradicting earlier claims by the Magazines which blamed tornadoes on Global Cooling) and it's happening now when Salon is blaming the extremely hot temperatures in the American West:

Arizona is burning. Texas, too. New Mexico is next. If you need a grim reminder that an already arid West is burning up and blowing away, here it is. As I write this, more than 700 square miles of Arizona and more than 4,300 square miles of Texas have been swept by monster wildfires. Consider those massive columns of acrid smoke drifting eastward as a kind of smoke signal warning us that a globally warming world is not a matter of some future worst-case scenario. It's happening right here, right now.

...Nonetheless, we have been experiencing a historic drought for about a decade in significant parts of the region. As topsoil dries out, microbial dynamics change and native plants either die or move uphill toward cooler temperatures and more moisture. Wildlife that depends on the seeds, nuts, leaves, shade, and shelter follows the plants -- if it can.

....Global warming, global weirding, climate change -- whatever you prefer to call it -- is not just happening in some distant, melting Arctic land out of a storybook. It is not just burning up far-away Russia. It's here now.

The seas have warmed, ice caps are melting, and the old reliable ocean currents and atmospheric jet streams are jumping their tracks. The harbingers of a warming planet and the abruptly shifting weather patterns that result vary across the American landscape. Along the vast Mississippi River drainage in the heartland of America, epic floods, like our wildfires in the West, are becoming more frequent. In the Gulf states, it's monster hurricanes and in the Midwest, swarms of killer tornadoes signal that things have changed. In the East it's those killer heat waves and record-breaking blizzards.

Gee, they left out the Giligan's Island runs and the New Rocky movie. Maybe its because what Salon is saying above is totally fraudulent.



Lets start with the western drought/hot weather claim. This is what the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says about it:

This comes hard on the heels of some of the worst droughts on record across the globe, from Texas to China.

While global warming is an obvious suspect, there's no evidence that it is to blame. Though climate change models predict extended droughts and periods of intense rainfall for the end of the 21st century, they don't explain the current droughts, says Martin Hoerling at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "A lot of these extreme conditions are natural variations of the climate. Extremes happen, heat waves happen, heavy rains happen," he says.

Drought across the southern US - and heavy rains across the north of the country - are a result of La Niña, says Michael Hayes, director of the National Drought Mitigation Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. An extended holding pattern in the jet stream, the same type of "blocking event" that caused last summer's heat wave in Russia, is responsible for this year's European droughts, says Michael Blackburn of the University of Reading, UK. As for the apparent convergence of droughts worldwide, Mark Saunders of University College London says current conditions aren't that unusual

How about those horrible tornadoes this past spring? This claim is just as fraudulent, Fox News reported:

Greg Carbin, the warning coordination meteorologist at NOAA’s Storm Prediction Center in Norman, Oklahoma, said warming trends do create more of the fuel that tornadoes require, such as moisture, but that they also deprive tornadoes of another essential ingredient: wind shear.

“We know we have a warming going on,” Carbin told Fox News in an interview Thursday, but added: “There really is no scientific consensus or connection [between global warming and tornadic activity]….Jumping from a large-scale event like global warming to relatively small-scale events like tornadoes is a huge leap across a variety of scales.”

Asked if climate change should be “acquitted” in a jury trial where it stood charged with responsibility for tornadoes, Carbin replied: “I would say that is the right verdict, yes.” Because there is no direct connection as yet established between the two? “That’s correct,” Carbin replied.

According to Grady Dixon, assistant professor of meteorology and climatology at Mississippi State University:

"If you look at the past 60 years of data, the number of tornadoes is increasing significantly, but it's agreed upon by the tornado community that it's not a real increase,"he said .

"It's having to do with better (weather tracking) technology, more population, the fact that the population is better educated and more aware. So we're seeing them more often," Dixon said.

But he said it would be "a terrible mistake" to relate the up-tick to climate change.

Salon is also naming Global Warming as the reason many of us in the Northeastern US had to spend so much time shoveling snow during the past two winters. After last year's snow-filled winter the NOAA issued a report in March 2010 which said:

They [NOAA investigators] found no evidence — no human “fingerprints” — to implicate our involvement in the snowstorms. If global warming was the culprit, the team would have expected to find a gradual increase in heavy snowstorms in the mid-Atlantic region as temperatures rose during the past century. But historical analysis revealed no such increase in snowfall. Nor did the CSI team find any indication of an upward trend in winter precipitation along the eastern seaboard.....

....The CSI Team found abundant historical evidence of heavy mid-Atlantic snowstorms whenever an El Niño and a negative NAO acted in concert, further supporting their conclusion that the record-setting snowstorms were the result of natural causes. But could global warming have elevated the potency of this dynamic duo? Again, the CSI Team didn’t find a connection.

Some of you may be thinking "well that was last year," and you would be totally justified except for the fact that two weeks ago the NOAA said, just like last year, this year's snow has nothing to do with man.

I would never make the claim that I am a scientist, or a science expert of any kind, but I can read.  Based in that ability I would make the simple proposal to the people at Salon that,  before they make claims about global warming, climate change or whatever the moonbats are calling it this week, maybe they should try to gain proficiency at the reading thing.  Because if someone like me, who's science training consists of watching Mr. Wizard on a 19 inch black and white television 40 years ago can find scientific information which proves their claim to be nothing but hype and lies  they could do the same thing.  And while I appreciate the material (especially now that Anthony Weiner resigned) sending out false alarms to the public is usually not the best tactic for a self-described, "award-winning online news and entertainment Web site."