<p>Saw this on Ace of Spades website: </p>
<p>"As they say, whenever Al Gore shows up to talk about how unbearably, deadly hot the planet is getting, bring your ice-chains and wear your longjohns.</p>
<p>It’s offical:</p>
<p>God hates Al Gore."</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm[/url]”>http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm</a></p>
<p>He mentioned in his documentary, and it’s widely understood, that while global warming is increasing average world temperatures, that does not mean a necessary average increase uniformally in every place of the globe. Some places are getting significantly warmer, others may get a bit cooler, even. Some places may see very few changes. It’s not difficult science. I live in New England and despite this storm, the weather has been incredibly warm. I remember calling my family in early January and being informed that it was 58 degrees outside. Even with the recent cold spell, it’s been unseasonably warm.</p>
<p>We took a bike ride mid January, on a day that registered 82 degrees. We wore shorts.</p>
<p>This is our first storm of the season.</p>
<p>If you see a “Mission Accomplished” sign, you know it’s time to line up for another tour.</p>
<pre><code>If anything, God hates George W. Bush.
</code></pre>
<p>SS-you must be a scientist to formulate such a hypothesis, design the experiment, collect your data and come to such a rational conclusion. </p>
<p>I am impressed.</p>
<p>originaloog, I see you are suffering from a serious humor impairment.</p>
<p>I do, by the way, have a much stronger science background than Al Gore. Does Allmusic’s account of her 82 degree bike ride fit your idea of a scientific conclusion?</p>
<p>I don’t know from global warming, but I DO know that the world is made of irony, right to the core.</p>
<p>Great point WashDad, </p>
<p>it seems the importance of being earnest–in itself ephemeral and weightless–out-weighs the cultural mettle of irony.</p>
<p>It does, however, take the humor out of human–even with the best of intentions.</p>
<p>How much money, again, has ExxonMobil put in to trying to convince the public that global warming doesn’t exist?</p>
<p>I have mixed feelings about global warming. When we were in Canada and went on the glacier near Jasper (several years ago), they told us that while the glacier seemed to be retreating at the time, it had been advancing about 50 years ago (or 30 years ago??). The Canadians up there made it sound like the glacier had been known to be getting bigger some years and smaller others, more or less in contradiction to the global warming scientists reports.</p>
<p>otoh, a girl in our D’s hs did her science fair project on the issue and filled up 13 - 20 large binders of data for a meta analysis. She was grilled by college professors from the district to the state to the international science fair on this stuff. She got first place at district and state, but only some kind of honorable mention at international. </p>
<p>Her conclusion was that global warming was either not happening, or if it was, then it was just part of the natural life cycle of the earth, which has been going on for eons. The project data seemed to show that man had nothing to do with it, and if we should be worrying about anything, we should worry about how to adapt to what’s coming because it is more or less inevitable.</p>
<p>Exxon may indeed be “not guilty”, but we may be facing major climate change anyway.</p>
<p>The irony of the OP’s post is still very funny.</p>
<p>No attempt at scientific conclusion…just reporting a true factual oddity for a January day in the northeast. We had budding trees in January, but I understand how the climatechangephobes don’t like to acknowledge such facts.</p>
<p>I love global warming. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm[/url]”>http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>that’s so true and the central irony explains why the earth is magnetic at the polls.</p>
<p>
Phobia? Hardly! I’m a fan of real science, not junk science. Al Gore’s diatribes are fact-free. He would have us believe that the theory of global warming is as solidly supported with science as the theory of evolution. The truth is, we just don’t know. Evolution? Well, fossil records, carbon dating – that’s real science & that convinces me. A bit of tweaking as new data is discovered, yes. But a solid theory, I’d say.</p>
<p>The budding cherry trees in my neighborhood do not a far-reaching conclusion make.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.ipcc.ch/[/url]”>http://www.ipcc.ch/</a></p>
<p>You don’t have to listen to Gore or cherry trees. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, endorsed by our government, asserts that global warming is happening, and influenced by human actions.</p>
<p>Bush acknowledges it.</p>
<p>Gore draws his facts from the same info as the IPCC.</p>
<p>So, right, keep on choosing not to believe broad scientific consensus. It’s your God-given right as an American. That’s how we do science here.</p>
<p>SS, do you have a problem differentiating sarcasm and humor?</p>
<p>The Skeptic </p>
<p>Bob Giegengack</p>
<p>UPenn</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.phillymag.com/articles/science_al_gore_is_a_greenhouse_gasbag[/url]”>http://www.phillymag.com/articles/science_al_gore_is_a_greenhouse_gasbag</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I rarely use smilies, but I’m making an exception this time!</p>
<p>:) 
:)</p>
<p>HH–maybe if your skeptic was sparring with the vast majority of scientists (see above link) who study this, and not Al Gore, he would have more credibility. </p>
<p>We know that our actions are putting CO2, great amounts, into the atmosphere. No one disputes that. So to say that global warming causes higher CO2, rather than the other way around, is beyond silly. We may have only been keeping records of the temp for 200 years, but those rascally scientists have found ways to discern it back hundreds of thousands of years.</p>
<p>Then, he makes the argument, well, India and China are putting more and more CO2 in the air, so there’s no point in us trying to cut it. Why make that argument if you don’t believe it causes anything, in the first place?</p>
<p>And again, if you were watching Bush’s state of the union address, even he acknowledges it as real and partly man-made.</p>
<p>But being the contrarian sure gets that guy more press than he’d get otherwise.</p>