So, if there were actually global warming going on, the cool wet weather in the spring would have been replaced by warm, dry weather which would have increased northerly winds which would have caused an upwelling that brought up plankton for fish...?
No matter if the weather is wetter than "normal", drier than "normal", cooler than "normal", hotter than "normal", or more normal than "normal" blame global warming.
What a crock. Like sh!t, weather happens....
This article was in the Seattle Times a few days ago. In THAT article the scientist was also talking about nesting behaviour, etc. One nest area was abandoned after none of the birds could lay eggs - something he hadn't seen before (14 years or so as I recall).
He also said in the Times article something to the effect that "These birds are resilent tho - we know that because they are so widespread and have been around a long time and have been through this before".
Question - If a Redwood falls in the forest with nobody around - does a liberal still cry for it?
Actually you are completely misstating the consequences of global warming. The fact that the overall temperature of the planet will increase will actually lead to a decrease in temperature in some places as air and water currents change.
Generally the phenomon is referred to as "climate change". In the United States the term "global warming" is still used because apparently Americans think "change" is good.
There are quite a few valid criticisms in the global warming debate, but the fact that some places get cooler is not one. This merely shows your ignorance of the subject.
I just heard a new name for global warming on the radio (Joe Soucheray on GarageLogic). He called it "Gullible Warming". I love that.