[Lurking Libertarian]

There is a lot of junk science in the "global warming" field, but we should at least know what the theory of global warming does, and does not, predict.

"Global warming" is not a prediction that every spot on the globe is going to get steadily warmer each day. It is a theory about climate, not weather.

If, in fact, the climate as a whole is getting warmer, one of the short term effects will be colder weather in North America and Europe, as polar ice melts, drifts into the North Atlantic, and cools the neighboring continents.

[pandemoniumreigns]

"If, in fact, the climate as a whole is getting warmer, one of the short term effects will be colder weather in North America and Europe, as polar ice melts, drifts into the North Atlantic, and cools the neighboring continents."

And can you tell us who of the current meteorologist or climatologist is saying that the current winter blast in the northeast is being caused by melting ice?

[GBA]

What is the "correct" global temperature? It's been both hotter and colder, regardless of human activity. Does the planet have a "normal" temperature? Does the sun have anything to do with what the temperature "ought" to be? Does anyone actually know? What are the tests that have proved that the global warming theories are sound science? How is it the hurricane predictions were so wrong this last season if the science is so sound? How is it that the predictions about the rising ocean levels keep lowering with every UN report?

[redangus]

So let me get this straight. If it gets colder its GW, if it gets warmer its GW, if it rains its GW and if we have droughts its GW. GW doesn't mean the whole globe and as the climate gets warmer NA and Europe will get colder, even though the signs of GW are supposedly warmer temps in NA and Europe. Thank you Mr. Gore.

[appleharvey]

If, in fact, the climate as a whole is getting warmer

I'll accept that it is. The question is why? In my admittedly uneducated opinion, I don't think that we're the major part of it. I sure wish that there would be a true scientific debate on this, not just a one sided left wing diatribe.

[ProudFossil]

Now explain to me something else. About 15 - 20 years ago the rage was about all the smog, pollution, acid rain, nitrous oxide, etc., which was causing the global warming. It was going to kill us all by the 21st century. All the forests were going to be dead, we would breathe all the flouric acid and sulphuric acid which was going to burn our lungs up. The smog was going to be so bad we were going to go blind. What happened to all that stuff? At that time there was no mention of carbon dioxide. It was just a natural by-product of animals breathing and plants were changing it back into ocygen. Even the plankton in the ocean was seen as a countermeasure to the CO2. What has happened?

Now the culprit is simply too much CO2. No mention of the flourocarbons, nitrous oxide, ozone, acid rain, etc., etc., etc. Did the public finally get smart about the scam being pulled by the environmental wackhos?

Why is there no reporting on how much of the CO2 that is supposedly destroying us comes from the normal respiration of birds and animals. Why is there no reporting on how much of that bad CO2 is being converted back into oxygen. We now have more forests, vegetation, and plankton then we had 20 years ago.

Is this all a scam again with a different product?

And why were the English able to commercially grow grapes (for wine) 70 miles north of London in the 11th century. If your idea that warming one part of the globe means another part has to be colder, where was it colder in the 11th century? And during the little ice age of the 14th century where were the massive deserts to offset that bit of climate?

As I sit here in the coldest and snowiest winter since 1989 where is it that much warmer because I sure would like to go there.

Thank you.

[Wonder Warthog]

"If, in fact, the climate as a whole is getting warmer, one of the short term effects will be colder weather in North America and Europe, as polar ice melts, drifts into the North Atlantic, and cools the neighboring continents."

Didn't happen during the Medieval Warm Period, when the temp was 2-3 C higher than current, and stayed that way for 300+ years.

[bboop]

Hooey. "Global warming also means colder in other parts." Boy, that theory just covers EVERY contingent doesn't it?

[jwalsh07]

If, in fact, the climate as a whole is getting warmer, one of the short term effects will be colder weather in North America and Europe, as polar ice melts, drifts into the North Atlantic, and cools the neighboring continents.

AGW is the penultimate unified theory, it predicts everything and nothing. They can never be wrong.

Here's my prediction. The Earth will once again glaciate and deglaciate. Wanna bet I'm wrong?

[DB]

It is not colder because "polar ice melts, drifts into the North Atlantic".

[DB]

BTW, with all that "melting" going on, the rise in sea level is virtually unmeasurable.

[Mike Darancette]

If, in fact, the climate as a whole is getting warmer, one of the short term effects will be colder weather in North America and Europe, as polar ice melts, drifts into the North Atlantic, and cools the neighboring continents.

Do you really think that enough icebergs can float from Western Greenland to effect Western Europe and how about Western North America?

[cgbg]

It is a theory

The definition of "theory" these days is a kooky idea that can get a bunch of professors federal and international funding.

The Earth gets colder sometimes, sometimes it gets warmer. It is a fascinating feature of this "theory" (at least as preached by media and political types) that draws a circle around China and India and says that they have no effect on the Earth's climate, eh?

;-)