OK, I know those that maintain we are actually warming up this planet have stated that the reason for the snowfall on the eastern seaboard and now here in Texas is a result of the warmer air holding more moisture. So... I may be swayed into believing the "warmers" on the fact that warm air holds more moisture. However, on the local news yesterday, it was stated that our high temperature was 20, yes 20 degrees colder than the normal average for this day each year. Since the high hit a whopping 39 degrees, that means the normal temperature should be in the high 50's and I should be out riding my motorcycle.
Now forgive me if my logic is a bit messy here...but, since we were 20 degrees colder yesterday than normal and now have 6" of snow on the ground, would it not be logical to deduce that if the planet is warming than the temperature would have been higher or at least close to the normal high? Stay with me here... if the temperature is higher AND the air is holding more moisture, then would we not be getting rain instead of snow?
For some reason, this is just not making sense to me. Here in north Texas, the snowfall for today is the most snow in one day for over 30 years. Temperatures are 20 degrees below normal. Now it's looking like I am going to have to go find a snow shovel to make it to the mailbox.
Now, let's take a little trip down memory lane... Being the old curmudgeon that I am, I was in elementary school back in the 70's when the old Pitch In campaign was being force fed to me in public school. We had the joy of sitting through hours of movies on the environment and all of the damage that humans were causing. Back then, the word was if we didn't change our ways, we would experience another ice age because temperatures were falling. Iron Eyes Cody was seen crying on television ads about the sad state of America. How can we forget Woodsy the Owl and the catch phrase "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute". Now the campaign did have some benefits, we did clean things up somewhat and there is less trash in our waterways and the air is cleaner. However, that ice age cry still sticks with me today as an example of faulty science.
Now the one thing I find strangest about the Pitch In movement of the 70's and the dire predictions of that time are the parallels with the "warmers" of today. The doomsday cries of global climate change for one. In the 70's it was another ice age, now 30 plus years later, it's global warming. Strangely, the 70's campaign has all but disappeared from view today. I have scoured the Internet trying to locate some of the "studies" that were done back then and have had problems finding a real mention of any of them outside of a blurb here and there. Apparently they are no longer relevant, or maybe they just weren't accurate assessments even at that time.
Now let's move forward to today. First we have garbage science that is using articles from environmental activists (spell that nut jobs) from a magazine devoted to climbing and supposition by other "scientists" on the melting of glaciers and representing those as facts. Of course we cannot forget the email scandal with faked information on global warming.
To me, I find it hard to believe much of anything, first we have only been tracking weather on a semi-large scale for about 150 years. Everyone knows that Earth has experienced at least five major ice ages that came and went long before humans were polluting the air and the planet. How can we, with so little actual data, determine that the changes to the environment (if there really are any) are anything more than normal fluctuations? Hell, even the local meteorologist can't get the weather right for three days from now. What warmed the planet back up at the end of the ice ages? Fred Flintsone's car ran on foot power, not fossil fuels.
I'll anxiously await some environmental egghead's response to my questions. Right now, I have to go dig my chicken out of the global warming event before she freezes to death.
Now forgive me if my logic is a bit messy here...but, since we were 20 degrees colder yesterday than normal and now have 6" of snow on the ground, would it not be logical to deduce that if the planet is warming than the temperature would have been higher or at least close to the normal high? Stay with me here... if the temperature is higher AND the air is holding more moisture, then would we not be getting rain instead of snow?
For some reason, this is just not making sense to me. Here in north Texas, the snowfall for today is the most snow in one day for over 30 years. Temperatures are 20 degrees below normal. Now it's looking like I am going to have to go find a snow shovel to make it to the mailbox.
Now, let's take a little trip down memory lane... Being the old curmudgeon that I am, I was in elementary school back in the 70's when the old Pitch In campaign was being force fed to me in public school. We had the joy of sitting through hours of movies on the environment and all of the damage that humans were causing. Back then, the word was if we didn't change our ways, we would experience another ice age because temperatures were falling. Iron Eyes Cody was seen crying on television ads about the sad state of America. How can we forget Woodsy the Owl and the catch phrase "Give a Hoot, Don't Pollute". Now the campaign did have some benefits, we did clean things up somewhat and there is less trash in our waterways and the air is cleaner. However, that ice age cry still sticks with me today as an example of faulty science.
Now the one thing I find strangest about the Pitch In movement of the 70's and the dire predictions of that time are the parallels with the "warmers" of today. The doomsday cries of global climate change for one. In the 70's it was another ice age, now 30 plus years later, it's global warming. Strangely, the 70's campaign has all but disappeared from view today. I have scoured the Internet trying to locate some of the "studies" that were done back then and have had problems finding a real mention of any of them outside of a blurb here and there. Apparently they are no longer relevant, or maybe they just weren't accurate assessments even at that time.
Now let's move forward to today. First we have garbage science that is using articles from environmental activists (spell that nut jobs) from a magazine devoted to climbing and supposition by other "scientists" on the melting of glaciers and representing those as facts. Of course we cannot forget the email scandal with faked information on global warming.
To me, I find it hard to believe much of anything, first we have only been tracking weather on a semi-large scale for about 150 years. Everyone knows that Earth has experienced at least five major ice ages that came and went long before humans were polluting the air and the planet. How can we, with so little actual data, determine that the changes to the environment (if there really are any) are anything more than normal fluctuations? Hell, even the local meteorologist can't get the weather right for three days from now. What warmed the planet back up at the end of the ice ages? Fred Flintsone's car ran on foot power, not fossil fuels.
I'll anxiously await some environmental egghead's response to my questions. Right now, I have to go dig my chicken out of the global warming event before she freezes to death.
