Getting even more disgusted....

[golfing eagles]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

[kansasr]

Your grandchildren are just going to love the world we're leaving for them.

[golfing eagles]

Your grandchildren are just going to love the world we're leaving for them.

Socially and politically I have no idea. But in terms of climate it will be no different in the next 5-10,000 years than it has been in the last 5-10,000, barring a substantial asteroid impact

[CoachKandSportsguy]

if you say it long enough it becomes fact

how fables and fairy tales are created

[mrf0151]

I am sure that if we throw Billions/Trillions of dollars at "the climate," we will be just fine.

[Caymus]

Your grandchildren are just going to love the world we're leaving for them.


If it gets hot enough the dinosaurs may return:angel:

[Maker]

Try comparing the long range forecasts with actual measurements. Talking about early spring time reports that the upcoming summer will be so much hotter than previous years.
That's been wrong for years. If they were all correct, then our summer highs would be 140deg by now.
There's big money in global warming.

[golfing eagles]

If it gets hot enough the dinosaurs may return:angel:

Who knows? It's possible. But it will probably take another 65 million years. Meanwhile, the anthropogenic climate change advocates with their agenda (which generally translates to $$$) want to convince you that our grandchildren will die from the heat. (After all, cashing in on this false narrative in 65 million years is not what they are aiming for)

[Bill14564]

"It's not the heat, it's the humidity."

It's actually both. I've been in 100+ temps in Az where the humidity was low - it felt pretty comfortable. In Md where we get 80-90 degree temps but a high humidity it felt terrible. Here in Fl it is usually somewhere in between.

Have you found a site that gives both temperature and humidity measurements for each day in 2021, 2022, and 2023? Post the link and I'll get the heat index numbers for late July and early August so we can compare apples to apples.

But you can't ignore the value of hysteria either. I remember not so long ago when we heard forecasts of hurricanes about to hit or tropical storms about to become hurricanes. Now we hear forecasts of tropical disturbances that might become tropical depressions that might become tropical storms that might become hurricanes that might come close to the States. No one really cares if it's warm again today but if they can announce the EXTREMELY HEAT DANGER then they get viewers and can sell advertising.

[Two Bills]

I am not clever enough to agree or refute the climate argument.
All I know is that in my lifetime the UK winters have been slowly getting less severe.
Summers have been summers, some good, some not so good.
This year has been crap. Rain and lower temps prevail.
Funny thing is, our BBC weather which is very pro-global warming, has mainly reported on extreme temps in other countries to bang their drum, as apposed to our own more normal and cooler temps.
I still can't see how it is 'our fault' the weather/climate is changing due to emissions, as when I was a kid the air was foul, thick Smog, smoke, lead filled car exhausts etc. whilst now it is basically clear and seems fine.
I still see the changes as a natural phenomenon, not a man made situation.
Sad thing is, I will never know which side of the argument is correct!

[golfing eagles]

I am not clever enough to agree or refute the climate argument.
All I know is that in my lifetime the UK winters have been slowly getting less severe.
Summers have been summers, some good, some not so good.
This year has been crap. Rain and lower temps prevail.
Funny thing is, our BBC weather which is very pro-global warming, has mainly reported on extreme temps in other countries to bang their drum, as apposed to our own more normal and cooler temps.
I still can't see how it is 'our fault' the weather/climate is changing due to emissions, as when I was a kid the air was foul, thick Smog, smoke, lead filled car exhausts etc. whilst now it is basically clear and seems fine.
I still see the changes as a natural phenomenon, not a man made situation.
Sad thing is, I will never know which side of the argument is correct!

But, but, but...... The narrative they are cramming down your throat is that global warming is due to human activity specifically burning fossil fuels. But we have been warming (in the current cycle) for 20,000 years.

I have issued this challenge numerous times to the acolytes of those who would profit from monies spent on "climate change": What make and model of SUV did Fred Flintstone drive???

[Bill14564]

But, but, but...... The narrative they are cramming down your throat is that global warming is due to human activity specifically burning fossil fuels. But we have been warming (in the current cycle) for 20,000 years.

I have issued this challenge numerous times to the acolytes of those who would profit from monies spent on "climate change": What make and model of SUV did Fred Flintstone drive???

Not exactly. Warming (and cooling) has been occurring for millions of years (as some on here constantly point out). However, the *rate* of warming has increased as the world has increased its use of fossil fuels. It is that increase in rate that the climatologists are worried about.

[fdpaq0580]

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2242345]I generally watch /QUOTE]

Whoa there! If watching makes you disgusted, switch to the golf channel. No sense getting your guts in an uproar over stuff you just don't get. Stick with golf and medical science and you'll be fine.

[fdpaq0580]

Not exactly. Warming (and cooling) has been occurring for millions of years (as some on here constantly point out). However, the *rate* of warming has increased as the world has increased its use of fossil fuels. It is that increase in rate that the climatologists are worried about.

Yep. But, some just can't (or won't) grasp the notion.

[golfing eagles]

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2242345]I generally watch /QUOTE]

Whoa there! If watching makes you disgusted, switch to the golf channel. No sense getting your guts in an uproar over stuff you just don't get. Stick with golf and medical science and you'll be fine.

Half right. Believe me, I GET it. But at least golf is what it is, climate change is what those who would profit WANT it to be. But they can't do it alone, so they need to recruit the masses to buy into their false narrative, to vote to combat it, and to spend trillions on it, while they laugh all the way to the bank.

[golfing eagles]

Yep. But, some just can't (or won't) grasp the notion.

OK, want to play?? I'll play.

Let's say you're right, and we are accelerating the current cycle of global warming that began 20,000 years ago. You're not disputing that the planet started to warm 20,000 years ago, are you, because that would be inane.

And let's also assume you are not disputing that we are currently in an ice age, are you? Because the geologic definition of an ice age is a period when Earth's pole are covered in ice. So it would be equally inane to dispute that.

And thirdly, I'll assume you are aware that during the past 4 1/2 million years of our current ice age there have been cycles of glaciation and interglacial thaws that have run about 70-120,000 years in length.

With me so far? You should be, since the above are just simply the FACTS.

So, back to human activity accelerating this process:

Since we have been warming for 20,000 years, and many times before that in previous cycles, what is the cause of all this warming PRIOR to humans burning fossil fuels? Best science suggests a combination of variations in Earth's orbit and changes in our axis, and of course the immense power of the sun.

Perhaps you should also be aware that the #1 greenhouse gas is NOT CO2 (which by the way is currently at a relatively LOW level) but water vapor. This is why the planet is about 10 degrees COOLER than when the dinosaurs roamed about---the rise of high mountains in the Rocky and Himalayan plateaus act as a heat sink by removing water vapor from the atmosphere.

So now we get to the point where opinion and speculation enter, since we simply don't have enough hard data to make logical conclusions. The climate change advocates want you to believe that some data scraped together from WEATHER records of the last 10,20,50,100 years explain the last 4 1/2 million years and predict the near and distant climate future. Does that make sense to anyone???? It simply isn't enough data for long enough time to draw any conclusions. You also have to believe that burning some fossil fuels and increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, which is already low, will somehow negate and overcome the power of the sun, Earth's orbit and axis changes. I don't think can change it all that much.

So lastly, assuming that all the facts and science that I just laid out is wrong and your opinion is right, what do you suggest we do about it??? How should we spend the $100 TRILLION that they want to spend over the next 50 years, bankrupting the world???? What technology do we have that will negate those immense forces that are driving climate change??? Switch to EVs that get 80% of their energy from fossil fuels instead of 100%? BFD. More solar and wind power??? Drop in the bucket.

Bottom line: The whole narrative is a scam, propagated by a few who stand to make substantial profit, and further promoted by those who simply don't know better---jumpers on the bandwagon, secondary gainers, or they just think it's "cool" or in line with their political leanings.

[Bay Kid]

Climate change = money

[daniel200]

Regardless of all of the discussion, my home insurance premiums are rising much faster than inflation. Capitalism seems to either be working or not.

15 insurance companies decided to leave Florida in the last year. They say they did that because they find the market unprofitable

[golfing eagles]

Regardless of all of the discussion, my home insurance premiums are rising much faster than inflation. Capitalism seems to either be working or not.

15 insurance companies decided to leave Florida in the last year. They say they did that because they find the market unprofitable

Right on topic :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Eagle06]

Let's employ common sense here. I know, seems almost impossible. I don't dismiss that changes are occurring in an ever increasing populated world and as countries industrialize but I do look back at all of the alarmist theories over the last 30-50 years and see that very few predictions actually occurred. The Climate Change Agenda is a business, both a Political Agenda and a Profit Agenda. They sensationalize Climate Change, get the media to buy-in and the masses convinced the environment as we know it will drastically change and life on earth will suffer immeasurably Well, let's look again as historical evidence. Change has occurred throughout history and these times are no different, Earth and us will survive as we have for centuries.

[coralway]

This is a great forum. I am in awe just reading these posts. Everyone here is either a genius scientist or a genius lawyer. By the way, stay away from windmills, they cause cancer.

Living is easy with eyes closed

[golfing eagles]

This is a great forum. I am in awe just reading these posts. Everyone here is either a genius scientist or a genius lawyer. By the way, stay away from windmills, they cause cancer.


Yes, thank you.

[jebartle]

if you say it long enough it becomes fact

how fables and fairy tales are created

Just wondering, is that statement the "P" word!!!!

[Taltarzac725]

Homepage | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (https://www.noaa.gov/)

Find it hard to believe in a vast conspiracy to create an illusion about global warming.

Real conspiracies usually involve a small number of people who are acting for their own benefit.

[fdpaq0580]

Climate change = money

Medical care =money. Transportation =money. Food, shelter, clothing = money. Golf = money.
Right now, I am looking at the need for medical treatment for a potentially life threatening disease. It is going to cost me, one way or the other. I know I will spend the money. You might make a different choice. Ether way, someone will profit.

[golfing eagles]

Medical care =money. Transportation =money. Food, shelter, clothing = money. Golf = money.
Right now, I am looking at the need for medical treatment for a potentially life threatening disease. It is going to cost me, one way or the other. I know I will spend the money. You might make a different choice. Ether way, someone will profit.

It's hardly the same thing, and you (or at least you should) know it

[Kelevision]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

I was born and raised right here in central florida. Have been to Disney more times than I can count and last week was the first time I’ve ever seen the inside of the first aid building, or had to be wheeled there due to heat exhaustion at 11:30 in the morning. I’m in my 50’s and in good health. It was hot!! Too hot! I asked the employees how long they have to work outside and they said one hour is the max then they switch and go in.

[golfing eagles]

I was born and raised right here in central florida. Have been to Disney more times than I can count and last week was the first time I’ve ever seen the inside of the first aid building, or had to be wheeled there due to heat exhaustion at 11:30 in the morning. I’m in my 50’s and in good health. It was hot!! Too hot! I asked the employees how long they have to work outside and they said one hour is the max then they switch and go in.

Sorry that happened to you. But surely you are not suggesting that your one isolated personal experience is reflective of the last 4 1/2 million years of cyclical climate change.

[pokeefe45@aol.com]

I dunno. I just know it's getting easier and easier to maintain my tan.

[oldtimes]

Homepage | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (https://www.noaa.gov/)

Find it hard to believe in a vast conspiracy to create an illusion about global warming.

Real conspiracies usually involve a small number of people who are acting for their own benefit.

Never before has there been such a large audience. The media’s, both social and mainstream, only goal is to sensationalize every event. Everything now is exaggerated and larger than life in order to grab market share. It’s not news anymore it is theater whoever makes it most exciting wins.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Remember, the thermometer with a standardized scale is only about 125 -150 years old. So even the medieval warming period has no temp readings.

Linear extrapolation is way beyond acceptable mathematics standards

[Taltarzac725]

Never before has there been such a large audience. The media’s, both social and mainstream, only goal is to sensationalize every event. Everything now is exaggerated and larger than life in order to grab market share. It’s not news anymore it is theater whoever makes it most exciting wins.


I do not find that even slightly true. There are "news" providers that do that quite a lot but they are entertainers and are seen by media critics as just that. They were called yellow journalists in the past. And they do mainly just push stuff that is outlandish and often just plain false.

[oldtimes]

I do not find that even slightly true. There are "news" providers that do that quite a lot but they are entertainers and are seen by media critics as just that. They were called yellow journalists in the past. And they do mainly just push stuff that is outlandish and often just plain false.

It’s very true. One of my neighbors knows a meteorologist who told him that they are told to make their reports attention grabbing to boost ratings and advertising sales.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I think either extreme perception is disingenuous toward its opposite. "The sky is falling" is scare-mongering, and bad. "Everything is fine, carry on as usual" is denial, and bad.

I don't think we are /causing/ climate change. The climate changes, it has changed, it will change, whether we exist or not.

I do think we are /contributing to/ climate change. We are changing the geographical composition of our planet through building, drilling, creating cavities in the earth where they hadn't previously existed, taking that earth we've just dug out and placed it in piles somewhere else. Removed fossil fuels, and then burned them so they are no longer 'in' the planet but are now in the atmosphere, in changed form, instead. Polluted the land and seas, causing death to entire species of animals and by extension, upset the food chain. We've razed wilderness and planted produce, synthesized chemicals to keep insects from eating the food, which then poisons whatever animals eat those insects, and so on and so forth.

That is all things we, as a species, have done. We do it more and more, and we are slowly /contributing/ to the destruction of our planet. The planet will die eventually, as all planets eventually do. But we are helping to speed up its inevitable death. At this point, in my opinion, we can only hope that our species dies, or that we find a new planet to occupy, build on, and help destroy, before our planet dies.

[Decadeofdave]

Just got my thermostat monthly report up north for June, heat on 15 more hours and cooling on 6 hours less than June 2022. Fact 1. Latest recorded 90 deg day July 5th 2023 since 2012.
Fact 2. Only 90 deg day this year, normally 8 to 10 by now.
North American oscillation.

[Byte1]

Well, if we ARE causing the so-called Climate Change, then I wish we would do it faster. I'd like to see warmer winters up North so I could move back to a mountain area. I like the mountains and I like hot weather. So, keep it up.....if true. Personally, I am siding with those that say that man must be pretty arrogant to believe they can control the weather.
Brings back a memory of an incident in the early '70's when I was working up on the roof of a newly being constructed power plant. The reported temperature was 104 degrees and some of the other crews were knocking off due to the heat. We were continuing to work and even had to rest our power tools in the shade at times to cool them off. They were too hot to handle, even with gloves. I took my shirt off and an OSHA rep ordered me to put my shirt back on or he was going to fine me $50 and make me go home. That happened up North. Of course, many of us did not have A/C in our homes or vehicles in those days. Maybe some folks are just getting so spoiled that they cannot tolerate simple changes in their environment? One thing I know for a fact, the air is cleaner today than it was when I was a child. Cities were so polluted at one time that there were days when you could not see the top of buildings.

[Dusty_Star]

I do think the climate is changing. A long time ago Kansas was covered in thick ice. About 20,000 years ago, a vast ice sheet called the Laurentide covered much of North America, blanketing Canada and parts of the U.S. with a wall of ice as much as two miles thick. Actually I think the earth's climate has been changing for as long as it has had an atmosphere. Are we causing these changes? No, utter hubris. Are people making money off of climate alarmism? Oh yes. Are they hoping to achieve power & other goals? Definite yes. As regards Golfing Eagles news, the mainstream media have become immensely unreliable. Of course we can always rely on them to gin up alarm, because that sells.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

I do not find that even slightly true. There are "news" providers that do that quite a lot but they are entertainers and are seen by media critics as just that. They were called yellow journalists in the past. And they do mainly just push stuff that is outlandish and often just plain false.

absolutely they do it, even the sources you trust over others . . and there are proven reasons why the negative weather is exaggerated, 1 being NOAA lost a lawsuit for not emphasizing the danger of a storm and then some people losing lives, quite awhile ago. Making watching have a more enjoyable day, if the chance of negative weather, playing to human survival biases, emphasize the negative more, and then when it doesn't materialize, people have a better day!

There are so many subtle ways media influences readers/watchers with both included and excluded stories, as well as slants with presentation, words and phrases and data. . your subconscious picks up on most of it, the conscious not so much unless you are on the lookout for it. .

[ThirdOfFive]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.
I think the quote you provided answers the question more than adequately.

Somewhat the same thing happened--in reverse in Minnesota some time back. Up there, we had a something called a "Canadian high". A Canadian High is a wintertime phenomenon: they usually follow a period of snow and low pressure; sometimes blizzards, sometimes not. They're characterized by cold temperatures, bright blue skies, and varying degrees of wind. Canadian highs were welcome; it gave us good weather to plow out driveways, get the kids outside after a few days cooped up inside while the snowstorm lasted, etc.

Well, all of a sudden Canadian highs no longer existed. Instead, we now have "polar vortexes". Polar vortexes usually come with dire reports of falling temps, somber warnings to moms about how to keep junior bundled up if he absolutely HAD to be outside, things like that. Canadian highs were welcome. But according to the hoopla, polar vortexes were something to fear.

The weather service was questioned about it. They pretty much admitted to changing from Canadian high to polar vortex because "polar vortex" had more emotional punch.

Nothing like fear to control people.

[Chi-Town]

Some advice for a hotter world.

How to Build Up Your Heat Tolerance for a Hotter World | Time (https://time.com/6207087/improve-heat-tolerance/)

[CoachKandSportsguy]

The weather service was questioned about it. They pretty much admitted to changing from Canadian high to polar vortex because "polar vortex" had more emotional punch.

Nothing like fear to control people.

Part of this is to get a better weather response from the low IQ weather idiots. .
Yes, they do exist, I have seen them in real life. . . I have been one in real life. . though accidentally. . .

when my former boss took his child to the emergency room, he told his child "not be downplay the injury because you want to appear tough. . make sure that when the doctor pushes or presses on the area and it hurts, don't hold back . . "

trying to get the attention of distracted people is harder and harder these days. .
especially on the soccer pitch when fouled. .

good luck to us remaining

[kcrazorbackfan]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

I’d really also like to know why all the stations are so focused on the “feels like” temperature. It seems more so this year than before. Guess it’s their new buzzword.

[rustyp]

At the end of the day my body likes 78 degrees F and 55 % RH - do what you want to justify where you live and the money you spent.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

This is the best thing I've ever heard on the subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSrjAXK5pGw

By the way, you wouldn't believe how much climate change is pushed on news programs in Europe. Almost every news program starts out with a report on how hot it is.

[Tobys Dad]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

Lol!! Oh, sorry, you were serious.

[MrChip72]

This is the best thing I've ever heard on the subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSrjAXK5pGw

By the way, you wouldn't believe how much climate change is pushed on news programs in Europe. Almost every news program starts out with a report on how hot it is.

The guy is a well known grifter. Makes a great living spreading a narrative that a certain segment of the US is happy believe and donate towards. He even states that fossil fuels are good for the environment.

Farmers are having issues all over Europe that have not been seen in their lifetime due to climate change. Why would that not be the top news story? Food is pretty important to our survival in my opinion.

[Blackbird45]

Climate change, global warming, are these real and is it caused by man, that is the real question and until there is a definite answer there will be camps on both sides of this issue. Now the believers who claim man is responsible for the abnormal weather patterns say it due to the burning of fossil fuels. I personally am less interested in the weather changes than I am in the pollution we are pumping into the air we breathe. I did a job 30 years ago, in the mountains overlooking the valley in California, and the sky was a dirty yellow. When I was told it was pollution, I thought are we idiots we are living in our own filth. Look we’re poisoning our air, rivers and soil on the pursuit of profits, this is got to stop. I’m up there in age and won’t be around much longer, but one day this is going to come back to bite humans in the a**, hopefully this will be address before it is too late.

[golfing eagles]

The guy is a well known grifter. Makes a great living spreading a narrative that a certain segment of the US is happy believe and donate towards. He even states that fossil fuels are good for the environment.

Farmers are having issues all over Europe that have not been seen in their lifetime due to climate change. Why would that not be the top news story? Food is pretty important to our survival in my opinion.

Wrong, wrong, WRONG!

Farmers in Europe are having issues with a month or two of unusually hot WEATHER. Weather is NOT CLIMATE CHANGE. Collect 2 or 3 thousand years of similar data and then you can claim "climate change".

[TeresaE]

The secret to a happy life? Don’t watch the news.

[Andyb]

They are going to give you the news they want you to hear and not the real news. Mainstream news is their narrative news. Welcome to the misinformed world.

[golfing eagles]

They are going to give you the news they want you to hear and not the real news. Mainstream news is their narrative news. Welcome to the misinformed world.

Yes, and same TV station in my OP just seconds ago referring to today's high of 94 in TV in August: "The extreme heat continues". Of course they put up the heat indices instead.

94 in Central Florida is "extreme"? Unusual in August????
We should change his opening line to "The extreme BS continues"

[xcaligirl]

"It's not the heat, it's the humidity."

It's actually both. I've been in 100+ temps in Az where the humidity was low - it felt pretty comfortable. In Md where we get 80-90 degree temps but a high humidity it felt terrible. Here in Fl it is usually somewhere in between.

Have you found a site that gives both temperature and humidity measurements for each day in 2021, 2022, and 2023? Post the link and I'll get the heat index numbers for late July and early August so we can compare apples to apples.

But you can't ignore the value of hysteria either. I remember not so long ago when we heard forecasts of hurricanes about to hit or tropical storms about to become hurricanes. Now we hear forecasts of tropical disturbances that might become tropical depressions that might become tropical storms that might become hurricanes that might come close to the States. No one really cares if it's warm again today but if they can announce the EXTREMELY HEAT DANGER then they get viewers and can sell advertising.
I was raised in 100* temps in CA but very low humidity and the heat didn’t bother me like here with the humidity. But I love the humidity, not fond of CA, left at 60 and won’t return! You’re right, now any rainstorm near Florida is “going to be a tropical storm & then a hurricane”. The sky is falling…. It’s like they WANT a cat 5 to hit so they have something to talk about!! We’re fortunate that we haven’t had anything major hit but that’s also the reason why I agreed to moving to Florida but only inland and not on the coast! Who knows what the next couple of months will bring but, no matter what it is, they will be wanting to put more $$$ into trying to change global warming…🙄🙄

[Gunny2403]

Thank you for this. ABC is the worst… They offer The View with Whoppi, Joy, et el. Should tell you all you need to know. It’s freakin Summer!!! John Kerry working overtime with Greta to push their woke agenda

[JoelJohnson]

Where did you get your degree in climatology?

[golfing eagles]

Thank you for this. ABC is the worst… They offer The View with Whoppi, Joy, et el. Should tell you all you need to know. It’s freakin Summer!!! John Kerry working overtime with Greta to push their woke agenda

So true! And don't even mention "The View". I couldn't put together a similar collection of ignorant, stupid, idiotic, moronic witches if I tried. Especially that Joyce/Joy/whatever and her "climate change da-nye-ah" crap. Somebody should give her an extended vacation so she can go back and complete 3rd grade.

[crash]

But, but, but...... The narrative they are cramming down your throat is that global warming is due to human activity specifically burning fossil fuels. But we have been warming (in the current cycle) for 20,000 years.

I have issued this challenge numerous times to the acolytes of those who would profit from monies spent on "climate change": What make and model of SUV did Fred Flintstone drive???

There are many causes of global warming and man is one. The only thing we can do anything about is man’s contribution. If we do nothing and it is true the future is bleak if we do nothing and it is false we have left the world in a better place and spent some money. I choose for doing something as do 95% of climatologists.

[Cobullymom]

Your grandchildren are just going to love the world we're leaving for them.
Yeah and it has nothing to do with climate...

[BlueHeronFan]

Weather Channel doing the same thing. Talking points are out. If there is any rise in temps it has more to do with all the building in cities and roadways etc. Proven that the cities get hotter and they retain temps longer than rural areas. Sometimes they will even talk about it. Oops, not part of today's narrative.

[golfing eagles]

There are many causes of global warming and man is one. The only thing we can do anything about is man’s contribution. If we do nothing and it is true the future is bleak if we do nothing and it is false we have left the world in a better place and spent some money. I choose for doing something as do 95% of climatologists.

Correct, there are many causes of our current 70-120,000 year cycles of glaciation and interglacial thaws that have been going on for the last 4 1/2 million years of our current ICE AGE. But it is hard to blame man for that. The issue is whether or not we are accelerating the process for the last 100 years or so by burning fossil fuels.

The last 4 1/2 million years have been driven by the power of the sun, changes in Earth's orbit and Earth's axis. I have doubts as to how much the last 100+ years of human activity is adding to that.

As to that 95% number, it has been debunked over and over again. But still, a majority of climatologists are touting the false narrative. Of course they are. Try getting a government grant for a research project that will show global warming has nothing to do with human activity. Rotsa ruck. Try getting tenure. Try getting published. So if you are a climatologist that wants to feed his family, you tout the party line.

And spent "some money"???? $100 TRILLION is not "some money", it is global bankruptcy for the purpose of funneling huge sums into the hands of a very few. I would have thought all those with woke leanings would be against that, but alas, the media and university bombardment of the false climate change narrative have brainwashed many.

[MandoMan]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

I hear you. This isn’t a government plot. It’s a newscast plot. All of these TV news stations base their charge for advertising on how many people are watching. Most TV news stations, have taken to doing whatever they can to keep people watching. Decades ago, the weather report was boring. Now, the stations do whatever they can to keep people watching instead of changing the channel or going to the kitchen or something. The best way they have found is by presenting the weather report in an alarmist way and warning you throughout the news that you won’t want to miss this. Garbage. They are presenting the unlikely worst it could be as if people should worry about it. Thus the heat index. It’s so much more impressive than just the temperature because it’s so much higher. In the north, they also do it with the Wind Chill Factor. It looks so much scarier, so you keep watching through the next commercial to find out what horrible thing to expect. Alarmist! Remember that word. Don’t believe TV weather reports. I use Weather Underground online. It just takes a minute, and it’s in line with the national report combined with lots of local weather gathering stations. Try it. It’s very different from what you’ll see on TV, but more accurate. Imagine! You’ve been wasting maybe half an hour a day on TV weather! You don’t need to do that. TV weather also tries to keep people watching by using attractive weather women in sexy dresses and high heels. That’s for you, guys, and they lay look great, but the way they are being used is disgusting. Or they use weather men who crack jokes. Keep ‘em laughing. Yech! How often to you see serious, plain weather people these days? It isn’t common.

I don’t watch TV news or TV news/entertainment mixtures like Good Morning America at all (and I don’t get news from sites like Facebook, either). I thus save myself hours a day to use on other things—like writing this. I find much of the so-called news on TV to be alarmist and lacking in context. If there isn’t video available, it isn’t covered because it’s boring. Someone’s speech isn’t generally covered unless the person makes a gaffe or trips and falls. That’s when it becomes “newsworthy”. TV news is trying to make you a news junky—an addict. And the News level is aimed at the lowest common denominator of the audience. Do you want to be that dumb and gullible? Just say no!

[M2inOR]

I spent the last two weeks traveling around Iceland. Yes, the climate is changing.

Man caused? Doubtful.

We had a mini ice age 500 years. At one time, not long ago, Iceland was completely under glacial ice. That ice has been receding long before man stepped foot in Iceland and even Europe. Fossil remains also show teaches of warm weather plants and animals from thousands and millions of years ago.

Sometimes climate change is influenced by plate tectonics. Other times by astronomical events. Sometimes by volcanic action. None of those can be stopped by human activity.

Best we can do is adapt. Darwin told us that it's survival of the fittest!

[ringmic88]

Climate Change = Grifting for the politically corrupt

[golfing eagles]

I hear you. This isn’t a government plot. It’s a newscast plot. All of these TV news stations base their charge for advertising on how many people are watching. Most TV news stations, have taken to doing whatever they can to keep people watching. Decades ago, the weather report was boring. Now, the stations do whatever they can to keep people watching instead of changing the channel or going to the kitchen or something. The best way they have found is by presenting the weather report in an alarmist way and warning you throughout the news that you won’t want to miss this. Garbage. They are presenting the unlikely worst it could be as if people should worry about it. Thus the heat index. It’s so much more impressive than just the temperature because it’s so much higher. In the north, they also do it with the Wind Chill Factor. It looks so much scarier, so you keep watching through the next commercial to find out what horrible thing to expect. Alarmist! Remember that word. Don’t believe TV weather reports. I use Weather Underground online. It just takes a minute, and it’s in line with the national report combined with lots of local weather gathering stations. Try it. It’s very different from what you’ll see on TV, but more accurate. Imagine! You’ve been wasting maybe half an hour a day on TV weather! You don’t need to do that. TV weather also tries to keep people watching by using attractive weather women in sexy dresses and high heels. That’s for you, guys, and they lay look great, but the way they are being used is disgusting. Or they use weather men who crack jokes. Keep ‘em laughing. Yech! How often to you see serious, plain weather people these days? It isn’t common.

I don’t watch TV news or TV news/entertainment mixtures like Good Morning America at all (and I don’t get news from sites like Facebook, either). I thus save myself hours a day to use on other things—like writing this. I find much of the so-called news on TV to be alarmist and lacking in context. If there isn’t video available, it isn’t covered because it’s boring. Someone’s speech isn’t generally covered unless the person makes a gaffe or trips and falls. That’s when it becomes “newsworthy”. TV news is trying to make you a news junky—an addict. And the News level is aimed at the lowest common denominator of the audience. Do you want to be that dumb and gullible? Just say no!

I agree, EXCEPT----in a few hours POTUS will be in Arizona pushing his "climate change agenda" and all the "accomplishments he has made" so far. I think it goes beyond sensationalized weather reports. The additional advertising revenue a media outlet might gain from sensationalized reporting are just crumbs from the table of the real powers that stand to gain from spending trillions on this "agenda"

[mikemalloy]

Your grandchildren are just going to love the world we're leaving for them.

Are you referring to the debt that they will have to service?

[waterflower]

Welcome to mind control 101
problem-they cause
reaction-your scared-government help me
solution-grab your money and never fix anything

[Cobullymom]

Are you referring to the debt that they will have to service?
The dept, the corruption, the socialism and much more..

[NoMo50]

It's Florida. It's summer. It's hot. That's breaking news?

I've said this many times, and stand by my assertion: If you really want to know what drives the man-caused climate agenda, follow the money.

[bogmonster]

If you look at the hard numbers that the climate people put out, transportation is a very small contributor to CO2. One of the biggest is air conditioning.

To that point, all those that truly believe in global warming, please post your addresses and I will personally stop by and pull your air conditioner cut out switch so that you are no longer a contributor.

Wait, what? It’s not your air conditioner that is the problem, just mine? How could I be so blind?

[bonrich]

The only way I can tell if the weather is to be bad, is when the TV weathermen show up with their suit jackets off, and their sleeves rolled up. They are in a heightened state of excitement and moving quickly on the map. Then I know it's going to be a climate change catastrophe!

[NoMo50]

What make and model of SUV did Fred Flintstone drive???

Had nothing to do with Fred's SUV. I blame it on dinosaur flatulence.

[rsmurano]

The earth goes thru these climate cycles every so many thousands of years and it will keep doing so, no matter if we drive gas cars, have cows that fart, or have billions of people on it. Most of the media fake news channels push a certain narrative and has been doing this for many years. You can go back a 100 years and look at these so called climate scientists that claim glaciers are thawing (we had 40,000 glaciers back then, and we have the same amount today), our coastlines will be under inches of water each year, our former president was getting blamed for some of the hurricanes we had those years, and you remember the big ozone hole that was so scary looking many years ago? Some of these dire predictions also used the term "10 years from now we are doomed if nothing gets done", sound familiar?
BTW: I did get a kick out of the weather channel last year during the hurricane evacuations we were having. They actually stated to "not" use your EV to evacuate, and they listed a few reasons. This was from a pro-climate crisis channel.

[Sabella]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

Thank you hopefully people are smart enough to get what you’re saying and to stop listening to fake alarmist news.

[rherb55]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

You need another hobby……

[NotGolfer]

I'm from the midwest, where there are/were a lot of farms etc. The folks up there will say that the climate cycles. Some years are hotter OR wetter than others. Farmers depend on weather so many use the Farmer's Almanac or other publications. Yes, this summer seems unusual. It's HOT up north too---as well as out west. Being from the midwest, they do get brief respites where the temps are pleasant. BUT as another stated---humidity has a lot to do with the "comfort" etc. I don't watch the MSM because they're "selling" time and ratings.
I do believe there's an adjenda but many are too blind to recognize it and I'm not speaking of JUST the weather!

[rherb55]

You have too much time on your hands…. Get out of the house and enjoy your life. Don’t worry about the weather…..

[Windguy]

There's big money in global warming.
The money being spent to prevent serious climate change is peanuts compared to the money being made by the fossil-fuel industry.

[golfing eagles]

Thank you hopefully people are smart enough to get what you’re saying and to stop listening to fake alarmist news.

Hopefully, but I'm not optimistic. There's a lot of power and money behind pushing this agenda.

All we can do is put the facts out there, but it's an uphill fight. Clearly, those powers that be already own working climatologists, have the support of the administration, have a knowingly or unwittingly complicit media, and the support millions of lemmings who think everything on the internet is true and can't add 1+1 for themselves. Not to mention America's enemies who would love to see us waste our resources tilting at the climate change windmill while they insidiously work to make us a third world nation.

Someone posted above the future is bleak. He may be right, but not for the reason he thinks.

[golfing eagles]

You need another hobby……

But yet, here you are :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[ThirdOfFive]

Is it just me? Or does this entire "discussion" resemble a group of fleas expounding on how to control the dog?

[golfing eagles]

The money being spent to prevent serious climate change is peanuts compared to the money being made by the fossil-fuel industry.

Care to back that up with the facts???

Don't bother, here they are, check it if you like:

Entire oil industry profit in 2022-----200 billion, which would be 10 trillion over 50 years

Proposed spending to "combat" climate change---$100 TRILLION over next 50 years. Or 10x oil industry profit. Care to revise your post??????

What I'd like to know is just WHAT "they" plan to do with $100 trillion? Sell more EVs to those that think electricity just appears out of the ether? But you don't need money to sell something. Build more nuclear power plants??? Seems contrary to "their" agenda. Send a planetary distress signal to the starship Enterprise so we can borrow some matter-antimatter reactors???? Or better yet, just like the remake of "The Day the Earth Stood Still", abandon all technology and live like cavemen. But wait, we've been experiencing global warming for 20,000 years during which time we WERE cavemen.

Bottom line, there is no current solution, just a scam to put mega dollars into the hands of the few.

[Bill14564]

If you look at the hard numbers that the climate people put out, transportation is a very small contributor to CO2. One of the biggest is air conditioning.

To that point, all those that truly believe in global warming, please post your addresses and I will personally stop by and pull your air conditioner cut out switch so that you are no longer a contributor.

Wait, what? It’s not your air conditioner that is the problem, just mine? How could I be so blind?

Do you have a link for those numbers?

Our World in Data (https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector) has slightly different numbers. Road transport (of which 60% is automobiles) accounts for 11% while residential use (cooking, lighting, heating, cooling) accounts for 11%. Not exactly "very small" or "biggest."

Significantly, road transport is direct consumption of fossil fuels while a large amount (majority?) of residential use is electrical generation. Clean up the electrical generation and the residential use drops.

[golfing eagles]

Is it just me? Or does this entire "discussion" resemble a group of fleas expounding on how to control the dog?

Exactly. But realize there is a small cabal of fleas with power and money that have very adeptly brainwashed many more lemming fleas into thinking they CAN control the dog.

[golfing eagles]

Do you have a link for those numbers?

Our World in Data (https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector) has slightly different numbers. Road transport (of which 60% is automobiles) accounts for 11% while residential use (cooking, lighting, heating, cooling) accounts for 11%. Not exactly "very small" or "biggest."

Significantly, road transport is direct consumption of fossil fuels while a large amount (majority?) of residential use is electrical generation. Clean up the electrical generation and the residential use drops.

So what???? Get rid of all of that and NOTHING CHANGES.

[MrFlorida]

Everything runs in cycles...next year may be completely different.

[Notsocrates]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

It is known, but has been ignored that the earth has been in a cooling phase recently. Look it up.

[Djean1981]

Yes, a great deal of our "news," is just propaganda. It's up to us to be wise consumers (research and verify).

[Bill14564]

The earth goes thru these climate cycles every so many thousands of years and it will keep doing so, no matter if we drive gas cars, have cows that fart, or have billions of people on it. Most of the media fake news channels push a certain narrative and has been doing this for many years. You can go back a 100 years and look at these so called climate scientists that claim glaciers are thawing (we had 40,000 glaciers back then, and we have the same amount today), our coastlines will be under inches of water each year, our former president was getting blamed for some of the hurricanes we had those years, and you remember the big ozone hole that was so scary looking many years ago? Some of these dire predictions also used the term "10 years from now we are doomed if nothing gets done", sound familiar?
BTW: I did get a kick out of the weather channel last year during the hurricane evacuations we were having. They actually stated to "not" use your EV to evacuate, and they listed a few reasons. This was from a pro-climate crisis channel.

I thought the numbers were 130,000 then and a130,000 now.
No, that's not right, it was 130,000 then and 198,000 now.
Though you have to wonder how it was possible to accurately count glaciers 100 years ago when some of the first satellites were not launched until just 50 years ago.

Models get created, predictions are made, actual events don't match predicted events, and models are updated. That's the way science is supposed to work. It fails when people do their own research and decide that since they can "prove" one prediction failed then all of science is wrong and should be discarded.

[Bill14564]

So what???? Get rid of all of that and NOTHING CHANGES.

According to the research climatologists have done or did you do your own research?

And besides, I'm just enjoying a whack-a-mole morning. Automobiles contribute very little but air conditioners contribute the majority. We have accurate counts of glaciers from the 1930s. But I'm bored with the "earth is in a cooling cycle" bunk so I'm not going to bother with that one.

[golfing eagles]

It is known, but has been ignored that the earth has been in a cooling phase recently. Look it up.

True, but that is just a short term phenomenon. We are currently in a 50,000 year warming trend. Not every year will be warmer than the last, not every century or millennium will see temperature increases. We can't use 8 years of a small cooling trend to prove our point any more than the anthropomorphic global warming acolytes can use 3 weeks of high temps in Arizona to prove theirs. But nevertheless, they are trying, and the sad part is there are some weak minded fools that will believe it.

[golfing eagles]

According to the research climatologists have done or did you do your own research?

And besides, I'm just enjoying a whack-a-mole morning. Automobiles contribute very little but air conditioners contribute the majority. We have accurate counts of glaciers from the 1930s.

According to the climate history of the last 4 1/2 million years.

Let's see----20 years of so-called climatologists shouting "global warming" ( the same climatologists who were touting "global freezing" 50 years ago) vs 4 1/2 million years of climate cycles, data gleaned from ice cores and geological strata.

I'll go with the historical record.

[Bill14564]

According to the climate history of the last 4 1/2 million years.

Let's see----20 years of so-called climatologists shouting "global warming" ( the same climatologists who were touting "global freezing" 50 years ago) vs 4 1/2 million years of climate cycles, data gleaned from ice cores and geological strata.

I'll go with the historical record.

So you've done your own research. I saw a meme about that not so long ago.

[golfing eagles]

So you've done your own research. I saw a meme about that not so long ago.

Don't be obtuse. Of course others did the research. Personally, I have never visited the South Pole or Greenland with an ice core drill and used LGC or NMR technology to analyze the samples. Since you seem to agree with the anthropogenic climate change scammers, have you done YOUR own research????

Goose/gander? :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Steve]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

Speaking of NOAA's multibillion dollar efforts to strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure, does anybody think it's odd that two of the biggest proponents of climate change and rising sea levels due to melting glaciers, etc.--Barack and Michelle Obama--spent nearly $12 million on an estate on Martha's Vineyard that is maybe 3 feet above sea level?

[stargirl]

I agree, the “heat index” is some ridiculous made up number. If it actually felt like what they say it felt like no one would go outside. Yesterday it said the heat index was 114. I played tennis and was fine, if it actually felt like 114 we would have all had a heat stroke!

[Keefelane66]

Speaking of NOAA's multibillion dollar efforts to strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure, does anybody think it's odd that two of the biggest proponents of climate change and rising sea levels due to melting glaciers, etc.--Barack and Michelle Obama--spent nearly $12 million on an estate on Martha's Vineyard that is maybe 3 feet above sea level?
WRONG

Coordinates
41.3742, -71.7744

50 feet above sea level

[conman5652@aol.com]

It’s amazing that u made all this degrees per day. Only heat advisory is a combination of humidity and degrees for day. Some people just can’t understand or care about their grandchildren lives

[kkingston57]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

Can't argue that the coral in the Florida Keys is now turning white due to high(actual temp around 100 F) in the water. Personally watch WESH. They report temps.

[kkingston57]

Who knows? It's possible. But it will probably take another 65 million years. Meanwhile, the anthropogenic climate change advocates with their agenda (which generally translates to $$$) want to convince you that our grandchildren will die from the heat. (After all, cashing in on this false narrative in 65 million years is not what they are aiming for)

Maybe it is a conspiracy to keep people out of Florida. HA HA. Lived in Florida entire life and went away for 2 months. One day over 90. Quite refreshing.

[Regorp]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

Our planet is older than a billion years, so climate change happens constantly thru millions of years. As The Grass Roots sang I'd Wait A Million Years to see it happen again. The Earth has cycles and this is one of them.

[The Chipster]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.




OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.



At the end of 1850 (roughly the beginning of the Industrial Revolution), the area containing the Glacier National Park had 150 glaciers. There are 25 active glaciers remaining in the park as of 2022. That's really all you need to know about climate change.

[golfing eagles]

Can't argue that the coral in the Florida Keys is now turning white due to high(actual temp around 100 F) in the water. Personally watch WESH. They report temps.

Yes, and today's ocean temp is 82 degrees. Does anyone, and I mean anyone with half a brain actually believe that the Atlantic Ocean, 20,000 feet deep in places, 22 QUINTILLION gallons of water, constantly churning with wave after wave coming ashore has a temp of 101.1, yet your 4 foot deep 12,000 gallon pool what just sits in the sun has a temp of 88????

GMAs opening story last week was that bogus temp of 101. The reporter was standing on the beach in Key Largo telling us that the ocean temp was "reported" as 101.1. Reported by whom???? When? After letting the thermometer lay in 1 inch of water under the noon sun for an hour?????

Now I can pretty much guarantee, given the media bent on global warming, that if that ocean temp was really 101, the reporter would be putting a thermometer in the water to show the world that the ocean temp was 101. Why didn't he? This report was nothing but an outright lie. The only place where water temp can get that high is right above an undersea thermal vent. And yet there are people who actual believed this nonsense.

[ThirdOfFive]

I agree, the “heat index” is some ridiculous made up number. If it actually felt like what they say it felt like no one would go outside. Yesterday it said the heat index was 114. I played tennis and was fine, if it actually felt like 114 we would have all had a heat stroke!
Agree.

My wife played tennis yesterday too, 10:00 AM. She plays in a group every Monday and Thursday. Yesterday, warm but not overpoweringly so. While she was gone I cut the lawn, trimmed the hedges, edged, etc. She got home (early afternoon) and the outside temp read something like 98 degrees. She said we were in a "heat advisory".

I wonder: if we had known that BEFORE we did our respective outdoor things, would we have felt hotter?

[golfing eagles]

At the end of 1850 (roughly the beginning of the Industrial Revolution), the area containing the Glacier National Park had 150 glaciers. There are 25 active glaciers remaining in the park as of 2022. That's really all you need to know about climate change.

Seriously???? You have to be joking, at least I hope so. If not, that post is absolutely classic "post hoc ergo propter hoc"---which translates to "after this therefore because of this"---it is the battle cry of all those with faulty cause and effect reasoning. After all, I ate bacon and eggs for breakfast this morning, and shortly afterwards there was an accident on I75. Therefore my breakfast choice caused the accident. Get real.

That's all you really need to know about irrational causation.

[Taltarzac725]

Urgent effort underway to save coral reefs from rising ocean temperatures off Florida Keys - CBS News (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coral-reefs-save-rising-ocean-temperatures-florida-keys/)

And then there are the coral reefs.

[JP]

I remember the 1970's and the climate crazies were saying that if we hadn't "created" an artificial heat dome from CO2 emissions we would be in an ice age and a big hurt locker. Really, nobody knows what causes climate change. We have been lucky for about 200 years to have been in a relatively stable climate. Times change, climate changes.

[fdpaq0580]

Seriously???? You have to be joking, at least I hope so. If not, that post is absolutely classic "post hoc ergo propter hoc"---which translates to "after this therefore because of this"---it is the battle cry of all those with faulty cause and effect reasoning. After all, I ate bacon and eggs for breakfast this morning, and shortly afterwards there was an accident on I75. Therefore my breakfast choice caused the accident. Get real.

That's all you really need to know about irrational causation.

No more bacon and eggs for you! Wait let's study this a little more. Was the bacon crispy? And how were the eggs cooked? Could make all the difference, eh?

[Taltarzac725]

I remember the 1970's and the climate crazies were saying that if we hadn't "created" an artificial heat dome from CO2 emissions we would be in an ice age and a big hurt locker. Really, nobody knows what causes climate change. We have been lucky for about 200 years to have been in a relatively stable climate. Times change, climate changes.

6 Claims Made by Climate Change Skeptics—and How to Respond | Rainforest Alliance (https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/everyday-actions/6-claims-made-by-climate-change-skeptics-and-how-to-respond/?c_src=MDS22VX&c_src2=22vvmmembcpc&creative=515229014072&keyword=global%20warming&matchtype=b&network=g&device=c&gad=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIvtHW-pvNgAMV_qFaBR384AiaEAAYAyAAEgKfDvD_BwE)

I wonder how long this thread will last?

[rickaslin]

One of the better post I have read !!

[golfing eagles]

6 Claims Made by Climate Change Skeptics—and How to Respond | Rainforest Alliance (https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/everyday-actions/6-claims-made-by-climate-change-skeptics-and-how-to-respond/?c_src=MDS22VX&c_src2=22vvmmembcpc&creative=515229014072&keyword=global%20warming&matchtype=b&network=g&device=c&gad=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIvtHW-pvNgAMV_qFaBR384AiaEAAYAyAAEgKfDvD_BwE)

I wonder how long this thread will last?

Absolutely amazing. The climate change advocates actually put out a propaganda manual to support their untenable position. I wonder who paid for it? Again, follow the money.

[Taltarzac725]

Absolutely amazing. The climate change advocates actually put out a propaganda manual to support their untenable position. I wonder who paid for it? Again, follow the money.

How about following the money as to who puts out various kinds of pollution? They have their paid bull ****ters as well even though the science is on point for the global warming warning academics.

[golfing eagles]

How about following the money as to who puts out various kinds of pollution? They have their paid bull ****ters as well even though the science is on point for the global warming warning academics.

The science is FAR from "on point". Most likely it has been bought and paid for.

Pollution is a different topic.

[Two Bills]

One of the better post I have read !!

Thank you.:icon_wink:

[cjrjck]

Your grandchildren are just going to love the world we're leaving for them.

Really? They are born into extreme poverty (debt) thanks to our generation with almost no hope of escape. What a legacy we have left. So self centered we happily passed all financial burdens to our grandchildren and their children.

[cjrjck]

Are these "religious" posts a violation of forum policy? The worship of science is a new age cult and one whose followers do not tolerate unbelief and unbelievers. While I am not a believer, perhaps this religion should be treated like other religions and afforded the same courtesies.

[rogerrice60]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.
Excellent Insight!

[Two Bills]

Really? They are born into extreme poverty (debt) thanks to our generation with almost no hope of escape. What a legacy we have left. So self centered we happily passed all financial burdens to our grandchildren and their children.

Wrong.
Our kids have been running things for years now, it is them who are passing on the debt and bad habits to the grandchildren.
When us oldies generation were running the show, personal and national debt was manageable, and we didn't live on unlimited credit.
I sleep easy!

[cjrjck]

Wrong.
Our kids have been running things for years now, it is them who are passing on the debt and bad habits to the grandchildren.
When us oldies generation were running the show, personal and national debt was manageable, and we didn't live on unlimited credit.
I sleep easy!

How old are you? When I look at congress and the white house, I see the power lodged with old men and a few old women. This has been the case for some time now with a few exceptions. If an octogenarian is a young person to you then your point is valid I guess.

[Taltarzac725]

Are these "religious" posts a violation of forum policy? The worship of science is a new age cult and one whose followers do not tolerate unbelief and unbelievers. While I am not a believer, perhaps this religion should be treated like other religions and afforded the same courtesies.


Worship of critical thinking and facts is not a religion.

[golfing eagles]

Worship of critical thinking and facts is not a religion.

And besides, the climate change acolytes have shown neither. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Taltarzac725]

And besides, the climate change acolytes have shown neither. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Creativity, critical thinking & climate education for the green transition - OECD Education and Skills Today (https://oecdedutoday.com/creativity-and-climate-education/#:~:text=Not%20only%20do%20students%20need,for%20m itigation%2C%20adaptation%20and%20action).

I suppose some flat earthers thought they were using critical thinking.

[golfing eagles]

I suppose some flat earthers thought they were using critical thinking.

Exactly! Just like climate change advocates

[ThirdOfFive]

Creativity, critical thinking & climate education for the green transition - OECD Education and Skills Today (https://oecdedutoday.com/creativity-and-climate-education/#:~:text=Not%20only%20do%20students%20need,for%20m itigation%2C%20adaptation%20and%20action).

I suppose some flat earthers thought they were using critical thinking.
Indeed! As undoubtedly did the phrenologists of 200 years ago and, of course, the opponents of Galileo.

[Taltarzac725]

Exactly! Just like climate change advocates

If the climate change deniers are right we will probably all be dead anyway. It will get too hot for humans and then it will eventually cool down around 2300 or whenever.

And we will have probably started created trash heaps on the moon. After someone like Elon Musk builds a colony of very rich people.

[golfing eagles]

If the climate change deniers are right we will probably all be dead anyway. It will get too hot for humans and then it will eventually cool down around 2300 or whenever.

And we will have probably started created trash heaps on the moon. After someone like Elon Musk builds a colony of very rich people.

Disagree. There have been over a dozen cycles of glaciation and interglacial thaws over the past 4 1/2 million years, and our hominid ancestors as well as more recent Cro-Magnon great-great......great grandparents have survived them all and have done so with essentially zero technology. If we all die, it will probably be at our own hands, not some climate cycle.

[Villagesgal]

Those Temps are for the Orlando area, not the Villages. Northern Villages Temps are lower than Southern Villages. You are using their Temps in Orlando. I've lived here 22 years, summers are a bit warmer as are springs. Winters a bit colder. Climate is changing, but then again it always does over the years. Don't be so fixated on the Temps that news station is reporting.

[Donegalkid]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

Zip code 32162 falls under Tampa Bay Area for monthly/yearly climate summaries complied by the U.S. National Weather Service. Link to data, e.g. for July 2022, July 2023 can be found at: Climate Summaries and Write-ups (https://www.weather.gov/tbw/climatesummaries)

One probably can get more specific actual factual data for Orlando area north …

NWS Tampa area summary statement for July 2023, as quoted from their site:

July 2023 Climate Summary
for West Central and Southwest Florida
Temperatures across West Central and Southwest Florida generally averaged a few degrees above normal in July 2023 with several locations in the Top Three Warmest for July, and Warmest Month on Record!

NWS Tampa area summary statement for July 2022, as quoted from their site:

July 2022 Climate Summary
for West Central and Southwest Florida
Temperatures across West Central and Southwest Florida averaged near to a few degrees above normal in July 2022 with several locations ending up in the Top Ten Warmest for July, including Tampa which set a New Record for the Warmest Month since records began in 1890!

So, maybe July 2023 was maybe a bit “cooler” than July 2022 and it seems both July 2022 and July 2023 were warmer than normal.

Enjoy the warm weather! So nice; love it.

[Sully]

Socially and politically I have no idea. But in terms of climate it will be no different in the next 5-10,000 years than it has been in the last 5-10,000, barring a substantial asteroid impact
...

[Vermilion Villager]

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.
Please name one glacier that is growing.........

[JMintzer]

Please name one glacier that is growing.........


Let Me Google That (https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Glaciers+that+are+growing)

[Vermilion Villager]

Care to back that up with the facts???

Don't bother, here they are, check it if you like:

Entire oil industry profit in 2022-----200 billion, which would be 10 trillion over 50 years

Proposed spending to "combat" climate change---$100 TRILLION over next 50 years. Or 10x oil industry profit. Care to revise your post??????

What I'd like to know is just WHAT "they" plan to do with $100 trillion? Sell more EVs to those that think electricity just appears out of the ether? But you don't need money to sell something. Build more nuclear power plants??? Seems contrary to "their" agenda. Send a planetary distress signal to the starship Enterprise so we can borrow some matter-antimatter reactors???? Or better yet, just like the remake of "The Day the Earth Stood Still", abandon all technology and live like cavemen. But wait, we've been experiencing global warming for 20,000 years during which time we WERE cavemen.

Bottom line, there is no current solution, just a scam to put mega dollars into the hands of the few.
Apples and oranges. The profit the oil companies are making is just a small fraction of the over all cost of fossil fuel. Also, I do not know where you're getting $100 trillion figure from. Even if it were correct (its "proposed" so even you don't know), the only thing that shows is that it cost a lot more to clean up the mess than it does to create it.

[golfing eagles]

Please name one glacier that is growing.........

Seriously?? There are thousands, most of which aren't named.. But I'll give you a couple that have names:

Jakobshavn Glacier in Greenland
Hubbard Glacier in Alaska

Or did you think that all 130,000 glaciers on the planet were shrinking, possibly disappearing like the polar ice caps were supposed to by 2010?

[golfing eagles]

Apples and oranges. The profit the oil companies are making is just a small fraction of the over all cost of fossil fuel. Also, I do not know where you're getting $100 trillion figure from. Even if it were correct (its "proposed" so even you don't know), the only thing that shows is that it cost a lot more to clean up the mess than it does to create it.

///

[golfing eagles]

The money being spent to prevent serious climate change is peanuts compared to the money being made by the fossil-fuel industry.

Care to back that up with the facts???

Don't bother, here they are, check it if you like:

Entire oil industry profit in 2022-----200 billion, which would be 10 trillion over 50 years

Proposed spending to "combat" climate change---$100 TRILLION over next 50 years. Or 10x oil industry profit. Care to revise your post??????

What I'd like to know is just WHAT "they" plan to do with $100 trillion? Sell more EVs to those that think electricity just appears out of the ether? But you don't need money to sell something. Build more nuclear power plants??? Seems contrary to "their" agenda. Send a planetary distress signal to the starship Enterprise so we can borrow some matter-antimatter reactors???? Or better yet, just like the remake of "The Day the Earth Stood Still", abandon all technology and live like cavemen. But wait, we've been experiencing global warming for 20,000 years during which time we WERE cavemen.

Bottom line, there is no current solution, just a scam to put mega dollars into the hands of the few.

Apples and oranges. The profit the oil companies are making is just a small fraction of the over all cost of fossil fuel. Also, I do not know where you're getting $100 trillion figure from. Even if it were correct (its "proposed" so even you don't know), the only thing that shows is that it cost a lot more to clean up the mess than it does to create it.

Congrats on the non-sequitur post of the day!

The premise from the first post was that money spent to "combat" climate change was "peanuts" compared to fossil fuel industry revenue

My rebuttal was that estimates/proposals/whatever you want to call it was at least 10x greater than industry profit

You post diverges to cost of oil spill clean-ups, which has nothing to do with the topic.

as far as the $100 trillion estimate goes, how about this from the Wall Street Journal?:

WSJ EXPLAINS
October 29, 2021

How Much Would It Cost to Reduce Global Warming? $131 Trillion Is the answer.
$131 trillion will be the cost of meeting some Paris targets, estimates the International Renewable Energy Agency

[Vermilion Villager]

Seriously?? There are thousands, most of which aren't named.. But I'll give you a couple that have names:

Jakobshavn Glacier in Greenland
Hubbard Glacier in Alaska

Or did you think that all 130,000 glaciers on the planet were shrinking, possibly disappearing like the polar ice caps were supposed to by 2010?

Jakobshavn Glacier in Greenland
Why a Growing Greenland Glacier Doesn't Mean Good News for Global Warming – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/2925/why-a-growing-greenland-glacier-doesnt-mean-good-news-for-global-warming/#:~:text=In%20March%2C%20a%20NASA%2Dled,instead%20 of%20retreating%20farther%20inland).
Hubbard Glacier in Alaska
Geologic Hazards - Climate and Cryosphere | Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys (https://dggs.alaska.gov/hazards/climate/glacier-change.html#:~:text=Alaska%27s%20glaciers%20are%20 in%20steep,Earth%20(see%20figure%20below)).

ANY QUESTIONS?

[golfing eagles]

Jakobshavn Glacier in Greenland
Why a Growing Greenland Glacier Doesn't Mean Good News for Global Warming – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/2925/why-a-growing-greenland-glacier-doesnt-mean-good-news-for-global-warming/#:~:text=In%20March%2C%20a%20NASA%2Dled,instead%20 of%20retreating%20farther%20inland).
Hubbard Glacier in Alaska
Geologic Hazards - Climate and Cryosphere | Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys (https://dggs.alaska.gov/hazards/climate/glacier-change.html#:~:text=Alaska%27s%20glaciers%20are%20 in%20steep,Earth%20(see%20figure%20below)).

ANY QUESTIONS?

2 articles that try to spin a growing glacier as bad

Any questions?

[fdpaq0580]

If the climate change deniers are right we will probably all be dead anyway. It will get too hot for humans and then it will eventually cool down around 2300 or whenever.

And we will have probably started created trash heaps on the moon. After someone like Elon Musk builds a colony of very rich people.

But the deniers are wrong on all counts, relying on false or inaccurate and partial anecdotes to bolster their faulty conclusions. Suffice it to say, you are right, they are wrong. It's a cult that blindly follows the leader.

P.S. And, by the way, if anybody should ask, Fred Flintstone drove a Canopysaurus, aka "Cavemobile" . It didn't rely on fossil fuels or electricity. No carbon footprint, only cartoon footprints.

[Eclas]

You'll have to prove that Bill. The fossil fuel argument is BS unless it can be proved. The scientists that keep pushing this bs are loving their grants and all the money they get. Talk to a scientists that is not being funded by the global warming alarmists.

Not exactly. Warming (and cooling) has been occurring for millions of years (as some on here constantly point out). However, the *rate* of warming has increased as the world has increased its use of fossil fuels. It is that increase in rate that the climatologists are worried about.

[44Apple]

if you say it long enough it becomes fact

how fables and fairy tales are created

Correct, as practiced by Hitler and Trump.

[rustyp]

Today 98 degrees
Thurs 97 degrees
Fri 98 degrees
Sat 98 degrees
Sun 97 degrees

Coupled with a low of 76 - 77 degrees each day. That's actual temp not heat index. The heat index is forecast to be 111 - 113 degrees. - enjoy.

[golfing eagles]

Today 98 degrees
Thurs 97 degrees
Fri 98 degrees
Sat 98 degrees
Sun 97 degrees

Coupled with a low of 76 - 77 degrees each day. That's actual temp not heat index. The heat index is forecast to be 111 - 113 degrees. - enjoy.

It's called central Florida in August, no different than 200 years ago

[golfing eagles]

But the deniers are wrong on all counts, relying on false or inaccurate and partial anecdotes to bolster their faulty conclusions. Suffice it to say, you are right, they are wrong. It's a cult that blindly follows the leader.

P.S. And, by the way, if anybody should ask, Fred Flintstone drove a Canopysaurus, aka "Cavemobile" . It didn't rely on fossil fuels or electricity. No carbon footprint, only cartoon footprints.

First of all, what you and others term as "deniers" are those that understand the science and paleoclimatology. The true "deniers" are the global warming alarmists and those that stand to make huge profits.

And thanks for reinforcing one of my points---Fred Flintstone didn't use fossil fuels---so explain the last 20,000 years of global warming.

[Tblue]

I too watch the weather forecast and the hype of higher temperatures and most always the mention of the "heat index" which seems to make it more severe. In a few months we will be hearing about the "wind chill". What is the wind chill today?

[golfing eagles]

I too watch the weather forecast and the hype of higher temperatures and most always the mention of the "heat index" which seems to make it more severe. In a few months we will be hearing about the "wind chill". What is the wind chill today?

True. But even if we have record cold this winter, the indoctrinated will claim that global warming can cause cold and snow

No different, than a page or 2 ago, I was challenged to "name" just one glacier that was growing. While there are thousands, mostly unnamed, I gave the names of 2. The rebuttal was some contrived article that used contorted data and logic to claim that the growing glacier is "bad" and is proof of global warming. So, I guess in their little fantasy world, climate change advocates actually believe that shrinking glaciers are caused by global warming AND growing glaciers are caused by global warming!

Go figure. And they call US the "deniers"! :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[fdpaq0580]

First of all, what you and others term as "deniers" are those that understand the science and paleoclimatology. The true "deniers" are the global warming alarmists and those that stand to make huge profits.

And thanks for reinforcing one of my points---Fred Flintstone didn't use fossil fuels---so explain the last 20,000 years of global warming.

My apologies for the use of the term "denier ". I didn't realize how it upset you. What term do you think more appropriate for one who denies the fact of global warming. I've got a few suggestions, but "denier" is by far the least objectionable, imho.

First off, Mr. Flintstone is not real, nor does he represent prehistoric humans in any real way. He is a cartoon version of Ralph Cramden of The Honeymooners.
Second, the natural cycle was disrupted, no real surprise, beginning with the massive increase in population, the start of the industrial revolution, the use of fossil fuel, and the massive destruction of ecosystems world wide.
Want to cry "Follow the money"? Then follow the BIG money and it will lead you right to big oil.

[golfing eagles]

My apologies for the use of the term "denier ". I didn't realize how it upset you. What term do you think more appropriate for one who denies the fact of global warming. I've got a few suggestions, but "denier" is by far the least objectionable, imho.

First off, Mr. Flintstone is not real, nor does he represent prehistoric humans in any real way. He is a cartoon version of Ralph Cramden of The Honeymooners.
Second, the natural cycle was disrupted, no real surprise, beginning with the massive increase in population, the start of the industrial revolution, the use of fossil fuel, and the massive destruction of ecosystems world wide.
Want to cry "Follow the money"? Then follow the BIG money and it will lead you right to big oil.

WHAT!!!!! Fred isn't real?????? How dare you---everyone knows he's real :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

And global warming IS real, It's been going on for the last 20,000 years, this cycle, one of many cycles over the last 4 1/2 million years----all WITHOUT HUMAN ACTIVITY.
Are we now accelerating the process? Maybe, but we lack long term data to make that conclusion. 20,50,100 years is NOWHERE LONG ENOUGH to conclude anything, despite what the false alarmist narrative being pushed wants you to believe

Follow the money---yes--the money is the 131 TRILLION needed to follow the Paris accords---makes the oil industry look like paupers

[fdpaq0580]

True. But even if we have record cold this winter, the indoctrinated will claim that global warming can cause cold and snow

No different, than a page or 2 ago, I was challenged to "name" just one glacier that was growing. While there are thousands, mostly unnamed, I gave the names of 2. The rebuttal was some contrived article that used contorted data and logic to claim that the growing glacier is "bad" and is proof of global warming. So, I guess in their little fantasy world, climate change advocates actually believe that shrinking glaciers are caused by global warming AND growing glaciers are caused by global warming!

Go figure. And they call US the "deniers"! :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Record cold this winter in Florida would be weather. Global (world wide) temperature, look at that instead of picking some local weather phenomenon.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

You'll have to prove that Bill. The fossil fuel argument is BS unless it can be proved. The scientists that keep pushing this bs are loving their grants and all the money they get. Talk to a scientists that is not being funded by the global warming alarmists.

The lack of fossil fuel argument is BS unless it can be proven. Prove to me that humans are NOT contributing to the accelerated rate of climate change. No examples, no anecdotal stories about your mom's hairdresser's house at the beach...no using the Noah's Ark story as your official research document proving that floods happen throughout history. No op-eds from Breitbart.

Show us the science. Not an article ABOUT the science, but the science itself.

[Bill14564]

You'll have to prove that Bill. The fossil fuel argument is BS unless it can be proved. The scientists that keep pushing this bs are loving their grants and all the money they get. Talk to a scientists that is not being funded by the global warming alarmists.

That the rate of warming has increased over the last 150 years is no longer being disputed, even by the deniers. I won't be proving it, I'm not a climatologist and the data is available to anyone interested in googling it.

[oldtimes]

Second, the natural cycle was disrupted, no real surprise, beginning with the massive increase in population, the start of the industrial revolution, the use of fossil fuel, and the massive destruction of ecosystems world wide.
Want to cry "Follow the money"? Then follow the BIG money and it will lead you right to big oil.

Yes, there are many contributing factors so why is fossil fuel the only target? Why do we think that switching from fossil fuel to electric which uses fossil fuel in a different manner and batteries which are toxic are going to save us? I think we should be planting more trees and stop ripping out grass.

[golfing eagles]

Record cold this winter in Florida would be weather. Global (world wide) temperature, look at that instead of picking some local weather phenomenon.

Exactly. Just as record heat this summer is weather. And so far this summer, no record has been broken on any single day. So, if you review this thread, why is near record heat this summer indicative of global warming but a theoretical record cold winter doesn't dispute it.

Answer, and you've already stated it----both are WEATHER and neither has anything to do with a 120,000 year cycle.

[golfing eagles]

Record cold this winter in Florida would be weather. Global (world wide) temperature, look at that instead of picking some local weather phenomenon.

Yes! Absolutely look at that. But you have to look at it for 2 or 3 or 4000 years, not the last 20 or 50 or 100. Projections based on 20 years of data are WORTHLESS. (unless you are pushing a false narrative that will enrich a few)

[rustyp]

Today 98 degrees
Thurs 97 degrees
Fri 98 degrees
Sat 98 degrees
Sun 97 degrees

Coupled with a low of 76 - 77 degrees each day. That's actual temp not heat index. The heat index is forecast to be 111 - 113 degrees. - enjoy.

It's called central Florida in August, no different than 200 years ago

Same dates last year
Aug 9 - 90 degrees
Aug 10 - 95 degrees
Aug 11 - 93 degrees
Aug 12 - 93 degrees
Aug 13 - 93 degrees

Proof positive climate is warming:
Same 5 days this year Vs last year are projected to be +8.6 degrees higher.
I could not find the same 5 days data from 200 years ago.

[golfing eagles]

That the rate of warming has increased over the last 150 years is no longer being disputed, even by the deniers. I won't be proving it, I'm not a climatologist and the data is available to anyone interested in googling it.

And you have proof that this is the ONLY 150 year period over the last 4 1/2 million years when the rate of warming has increased??? How about the periods where the rate of warming in the current 20,000 year cycle has slowed? How about the periods where the planet has cooled, even during the current warming cycle.

Again, we lack the data to conclude anything. The chicken little crowd thinks that extrapolating cherry picked data is "science" . Color me dubious.

[golfing eagles]

Same dates last year
Aug 9 - 90 degrees
Aug 10 - 95 degrees
Aug 11 - 93 degrees
Aug 12 - 93 degrees
Aug 13 - 93 degrees

Proof positive climate is warming:
Same 5 days this year Vs last year are projected to be +8.6 degrees higher.
I could not find the same 5 days data from 200 years ago.

Proof positive????? :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: Joking, right????

5 days this year compared to 5 days last year is "proof positive":1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Maybe you should submit that premise to the department of climatology at Harvard university as your doctoral thesis :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

(Some days I wonder why I even bother to educate some people)

PS: If you actually read a few pages back you'll find that the days 7/27-8/3 are 2.6 degrees cooler this year than last, as I had previously posted. But that also proves NOTHING

[Bill14564]

And you have proof that this is the ONLY 150 year period over the last 4 1/2 million years when the rate of warming has increased??? How about the periods where the rate of warming in the current 20,000 year cycle has slowed? How about the periods where the planet has cooled, even during the current warming cycle.

Again, we lack the data to conclude anything. The chicken little crowd thinks that extrapolating cherry picked data is "science" . Color me dubious.

For some reason you seem to be stuck in the past. I really don't care about 4 1/2 million years ago and I don't care about 4 1/2 million years from now. I care about what is happening today, what may be affecting it, and what might be done before my nieces, nephews, and their children have to deal with it.

One graph of data that shows the increased rate of warming over the last 150 years begins 2,000 years ago. Not the 4 1/2 million years that has your attention but hardly cherry picking.

[JMintzer]

2 articles that try to spin a growing glacier as bad

Any questions?

Reminds me of those on Twitter who adamantly Tweet something, only to post the exact opposite a month or two later...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F2ZapEraEAArXdh?format=jpg&name=medium

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F0nraLWXsAExQXD?format=jpg&name=medium

[rustyp]

Proof positive????? :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl: Joking, right????

5 days this year compared to 5 days last year is "proof positive":1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Maybe you should submit that premise to the department of climatology at Harvard university as your doctoral thesis :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

(Some days I wonder why I even bother to educate some people)

PS: If you actually read a few pages back you'll find that the days 7/27-8/3 are 2.6 degrees cooler this year than last, as I had previously posted. But that also proves NOTHING

Yet you posted it as the lead into this thread to illustrate what - the climate is not warming ?

[golfing eagles]

For some reason you seem to be stuck in the past. I really don't care about 4 1/2 million years ago and I don't care about 4 1/2 million years from now. I care about what is happening today, what may be affecting it, and what might be done before my nieces, nephews, and their children have to deal with it.

One graph of data that shows the increased rate of warming over the last 150 years begins 2,000 years ago. Not the 4 1/2 million years that has your attention but hardly cherry picking.

OK, so which is it? Our increased warming began 150 years ago with the industrial revolution, or 2,000 years ago????? You're contradicting yourself.
But don't worry, your nieces and their children won't have to deal with it, not unless they live to be 25,000 years old.
The 4 1/2 million year date is the beginning or our current ice age. There have been numerous ice ages prior to this. And during this time, there are 70-120,000 year cycles of glaciation and interglacial thaws driven by the power of the sun, Earth's orbit and changes in Earth's axis, among other things. Currently we are 20,000 years into a warming cycle. None of it has anything to do with fossil fuels. This is why the 4 1/2 million years mark is relevant--it explains where our climate came from and why we are here today.
Are we accelerating the warming??? Maybe, but there isn't enough data nor any conclusive proof. Are the alarmists correct? Maybe, only time will tell. But that time frame is measured in millennia, not the lifetime of your grand-nieces.

[JMintzer]

[/COLOR]

Yet you posted it as the lead into this thread to illustrate what - the climate is not warming ?

He posted it as an example of how the "Weather Readers" are misleading the public. Not as proof of any actual weather change...

[golfing eagles]

[/COLOR]

Yet you posted it as the lead into this thread to illustrate what - the climate is not warming ?

First of all, you really should learn the difference between a "lead in" and a postscript. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Secondly, I posted it to emphasize that a one year comparison MEANS NOTHING, to EITHER side of the argument.

Geez, my bad, I thought the post was pretty clear

[rustyp]

:a20:I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

First of all, you really should learn the difference between a "lead in" and a postscript. :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Secondly, I posted it to emphasize that a one year comparison MEANS NOTHING, to EITHER side of the argument.

Geez, my bad, I thought the post was pretty clear
What is a postscript in a letter?

A postscript is a brief message appended to the end of a letter (following the signature) or other text. A postscript is usually introduced by the letters P.S.

No PS. Centered mid post. Oh and look an addendum at the end. :a20::a20::a20::a20::a20:

[golfing eagles]

Same dates last year
Aug 9 - 90 degrees
Aug 10 - 95 degrees
Aug 11 - 93 degrees
Aug 12 - 93 degrees
Aug 13 - 93 degrees

Proof positive climate is warming:
Same 5 days this year Vs last year are projected to be +8.6 degrees higher.
I could not find the same 5 days data from 200 years ago.

Proof positive????? :1rotfl: Joking, right????

5 days this year compared to 5 days last year is "proof positive":1rotfl:

Maybe you should submit that premise to the department of climatology at Harvard university as your doctoral thesis :1rotfl:

(Some days I wonder why I even bother to educate some people)

PS: If you actually read a few pages back you'll find that the days 7/27-8/3 are 2.6 degrees cooler this year than last, as I had previously posted. But that also proves NOTHING

:a20:
[QUOTE=rustyp;2243267][/COLOR]

Yet you posted it as the lead into this thread to illustrate what - the climate is not warming ?

First of all, you really should learn the difference between a "lead in" and a postscript. :1rotfl:

Secondly, I posted it to emphasize that a one year comparison MEANS NOTHING, to EITHER side of the argument.

Geez, my bad, I thought the post was pretty clear
:a20:
[QUOTE=rustyp;2243267][/COLOR]

What is a postscript in a letter?

A postscript is a brief message appended to the end of a letter (following the signature) or other text. A postscript is usually introduced by the letters P.S.

No PS. Centered mid post. Oh and look an addendum at the end. :a20:

THIS is the thread. You referenced , by quoting, my response that included a POSTSCRIPT, clearly highlighted. Then you must have some sort of cognitive break by responding to my OP. I understand your confusion.

So to answer the question you intended, rather than the nonsense you actually posted, I made the OP not to dispute that we are currently in a warming cycle, but to question whether human activity has anything to do with it, while pointing out the incredibly obvious push of the narrative every day.

[rustyp]

[QUOTE=rustyp;2243277]:a20:



[QUOTE=rustyp;2243277]:a20:


THIS is the thread. You referenced , by quoting, my response that included a POSTSCRIPT, clearly highlighted. Then you must have some sort of cognitive break by responding to my OP. I understand your confusion.

So to answer the question you intended, rather than the nonsense you actually posted, I made the OP not to dispute that we are currently in a warming cycle, but to question whether human activity has anything to do with it, while pointing out the incredibly obvious push of the narrative every day.

Speaking of cognitive breakdowns I had no question. I simply posted a statement of fact. Last year Aug 9 -13 was lower in temp than this year's forecast for the same days. chilout I understand one of the conditions of delusion is cabin fever. Ah summer in mid Florida.

[golfing eagles]

[/COLOR]

Yet you posted it as the lead into this thread to illustrate what - the climate is not warming ?

:a20:

Speaking of cognitive breakdowns I had no question. I simply posted a statement of fact. Last year Aug 9 -13 was lower in temp than this year's forecast for the same days. chilout I understand one of the conditions of delusion is cabin fever. Ah summer in mid Florida.

Speaking of delusion and cognitive dissonance, it certainly looks like a question to me, including the correct punctuation with a question mark.

From an old TV commercial: A mind is a terrible thing to waste" :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[fdpaq0580]

Such fun!

[rustyp]

Speaking of delusion and cognitive dissonance, it certainly looks like a question to me, including the correct punctuation with a question mark.

From an old TV commercial: A mind is a terrible thing to waste" :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Yes it is - you win

[Bwanajim]

I generally watch WFTV (ABC affiliate) in the morning for local news and weather. I have no idea about other stations, but for the last 2 weeks they have been pushing harder than ever their narrative of high temperatures. This morning they claimed that we have substantially higher temps than normal, and used the terms "unprecedented", and "dangerous". What is insidious is their use of "heat index" almost to the exclusion of actual temperatures so they can put triple number digits on their map. No comparison of these "heat indices" with past values are given.

OK, actual high temps in the Villages 7/27-8/3----94,96,95,96,96,98,96 avg 95.86
Oh, wait a minute, that was LAST year
This year, same dates---89,90,96,97,91,95,93 avg 93.00 or 2.86 deg COOLER
This is what the weatherman claimed is "substantially higher than usual". So I'm calling BS on that.
I can only assume that the news media has access to more complete temperature data than those numbers I just pulled off the accuweather website, so clearly they are LYING TO US. Why???? Is there an agenda at work here?

Meanwhile, pretty much all of Central Florida is under a heat advisory, which the weatherman stated was unusual. True, there was no heat advisory this time last year when it was 2.86 degrees WARMER. So why is that?

Well, heat advisories are issued by the National Weather Service, a division of NOAA which falls under the Department of Commerce, lead by a cabinet level secretary.
So, here is what they are doing:
"Today, U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina M. Raimondo announced funding opportunities from NOAA's $2.96 billion in Infrastructure Law funds to address the climate crisis and strengthen coastal resilience and infrastructure. Over the next five years, NOAA’s targeted investments in the areas of habitat restoration, coastal resilience, and climate data and services will advance ongoing federal efforts toward building climate resilience.

Looks like they're getting plenty of media support for their "efforts"

Draw your own conclusions, but IMHO it appears that reporting temps as heat indices, issuing heat advisories when it is actually cooler than last year, and Good Morning America's lead story every day on the weather serves to push the continuing false narrative of "global warming", for which a few figure to profit immensely.

Addendum: This morning's GMA story is about a glacier they hunted for that is melting at an "unprecedented" rate. Probably true, but there are other glaciers that are growing. And in another 40,000 years those glaciers will grow 2 miles of ice over much of the Northern Hemisphere.

I Remember in HS Al Gore said there would be a coming Ice Age. Remember?
The hottest temperature in the US was recorded in 1913 in death Valley. I’m sure that was because of the internal combustion engine.🙄🙄😂
This whole climate agenda is about control. We could stop every bit of greenhouse gas, and it would accomplish nothing compared to what China and India is doing.
What scares me is so many people fall for this crap.

[Bwanajim]

This is a great forum. I am in awe just reading these posts. Everyone here is either a genius scientist or a genius lawyer. By the way, stay away from windmills, they cause cancer.

Living is easy with eyes closed

No, everyone here is just using common sense🤦*♂️

[jaj523]

China is building new coal mines at record speeds (one a week I've read) and has been excused from the climate accords. Much of Africa and South America are following suit. Their combined land mass makes up a lot more mass than the United States. Some of the nutty things this country is doing in pursuit of saving the planet are meaningless. Without the entire world working together, all the money we are throwing at climate change is a waste.

[Bwanajim]

My apologies for the use of the term "denier ". I didn't realize how it upset you. What term do you think more appropriate for one who denies the fact of global warming. I've got a few suggestions, but "denier" is by far the least objectionable, imho.

First off, Mr. Flintstone is not real, nor does he represent prehistoric humans in any real way. He is a cartoon version of Ralph Cramden of The Honeymooners.
Second, the natural cycle was disrupted, no real surprise, beginning with the massive increase in population, the start of the industrial revolution, the use of fossil fuel, and the massive destruction of ecosystems world wide.
Want to cry "Follow the money"? Then follow the BIG money and it will lead you right to big oil.

The hottest temperature on history in the US was in death Valley in 1914. Look it up. I think that was before the internal combustion engine.🙄😂

[Bwanajim]

Same dates last year
Aug 9 - 90 degrees
Aug 10 - 95 degrees
Aug 11 - 93 degrees
Aug 12 - 93 degrees
Aug 13 - 93 degrees

Proof positive climate is warming:
Same 5 days this year Vs last year are projected to be +8.6 degrees higher.
I could not find the same 5 days data from 200 years ago.

You’re joking, right? You’re not really comparing last year‘s temperatures to this year and say we have global warming because of it? 🤷🏼*♂️🤦*♂️🤦*♂️🤦*♂️ look up the temperature in death Valley in 1914 and get back with me. SMH

[mtdjed]

Same dates last year
Aug 9 - 90 degrees
Aug 10 - 95 degrees
Aug 11 - 93 degrees
Aug 12 - 93 degrees
Aug 13 - 93 degrees

Proof positive climate is warming:
Same 5 days this year Vs last year are projected to be +8.6 degrees higher.
I could not find the same 5 days data from 200 years ago.

Your statement is wrong since the actual data is already on record and is certainly less than 8.6 degrees. But, how can you possibly call this proof positive. That is like saying that today's temp at 95 and tomorrows at 96 is proof positive climate is warming. I guess that the following day at 93 would then be proof positive that the climate is cooling.

[sounding]

Ditto. There is no climate change crisis -- just a climate education crisis.

[Dusty_Star]

Ditto. There is no climate change crisis -- just a climate education crisis.

I worry it is worse than a climate education crisis. There is a strong narrative being pushed by powerful factions to spread climate alarmism, using mostly doctored 'facts' & emotional arguments. While I agree that if people were more aware of the climate scam, the narrative would lose its power, at this point education seems to be rolling off most believer's minds. I suppose the best we can do is follow the original poster's example & try to convince those with an open mind.

[golfing eagles]

I worry it is worse than a climate education crisis. There is a strong narrative being pushed by powerful factions to spread climate alarmism, using mostly doctored 'facts' & emotional arguments. While I agree that if people were more aware of the climate scam, the narrative would lose its power, at this point education seems to be rolling off most believer's minds. I suppose the best we can do is follow the original poster's example & try to convince those with an open mind.

I'm trying, but it is an uphill fight. The powers that are pushing the false narrative are well funded and have like-minded allies on campuses and in the media. The thought police have been unleashed. The real expert climatologists have been beaten into submission by the threat of professional suicide. So now they are attempting to marginalize anyone who doesn't sign onto their agenda. The real scary part is how many in the general public have discarded common sense and critical analysis and just play follow (the internet) leader like good little lemmings. Educators have been warning us that the science and math IQ of the American public has been steadily declining. The ability to scam so many with climate change alarmism may well be the proof that they are right.

[Dusty_Star]

Exactly. 💯

[fdpaq0580]

The hottest temperature on history in the US was in death Valley in 1914. Look it up. I think that was before the internal combustion engine.🙄😂

The IC engine was invented in the 1860's. And you can look that up.
By the way, oil is not the only fossil fuel, and oil was being used in homes and industry well before cars. Fossil fuels were almost exclusively the fuels of choice that powered the industrial revolution.

[JMintzer]

I'm surprised no one as mentioned the effects of this underwater volcano eruption...

Tonga Eruption Blasted Unprecedented Amount of Water Into Stratosphere (https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/tonga-eruption-blasted-unprecedented-amount-of-water-into-stratosphere)

[golfing eagles]

The IC engine was invented in the 1860's. And you can look that up.
By the way, oil is not the only fossil fuel, and oil was being used in homes and industry well before cars. Fossil fuels were almost exclusively the fuels of choice that powered the industrial revolution.

And……..?

[sounding]

I'm surprised no one as mentioned the effects of this underwater volcano eruption...

Tonga Eruption Blasted Unprecedented Amount of Water Into Stratosphere (https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/tonga-eruption-blasted-unprecedented-amount-of-water-into-stratosphere)

Tonga will be discussed in the next Weather Club meeting - Aug 17, 1:30 PM, at Laurel Manor.

[justjim]

As a “lay person” when it comes to weather and climate it’s best for me to leave it to the “experts” in that field. I only know for sure that it’s more complicated than I can discern. When 95% of scientists say one thing and 5% another, not having studied the subject, I go with the 95%. But to each his own.

[golfing eagles]

As a “lay person” when it comes to weather and climate it’s best for me to leave it to the “experts” in that field. I only know for sure that it’s more complicated than I can discern. When 95% of scientists say one thing and 5% another, not having studied the subject, I go with the 95%. But to each his own.

Once again, that 95% number has been debunked over and over ad nauseum.

Now, to get a handle on what the majority of these experts are saying, go back to a climate thread about 3 weeks ago. A TOTV member has a son who is a climatologist at a major university. He made the mistake of suggesting that global warming might not be due to human activity. From that point on he was professionally ruined--he couldn't get any grants, he was denied tenure and was unable to have any of his work published. This story has been repeated all over the world as powers that be stifle any opinion contrary to "chicken little, the man-made climate crisis is imminent and going to kill our grandchildren (unless we pony up $131 TRILLION to "combat" it).

So, while not 95%, it is a majority. But like most of, when a gun is held to our head, we will say what the person holding the gun wants us to say.

[jimjamuser]

Yes! Absolutely look at that. But you have to look at it for 2 or 3 or 4000 years, not the last 20 or 50 or 100. Projections based on 20 years of data are WORTHLESS. (unless you are pushing a false narrative that will enrich a few)
The last 10 years are the important ones for man-made increasing global warming, which is the opinion of over 99% of climate scientists. The increasing world population and increasing use of CO2-releasing ICE vehicles have created a heat shield in the upper atmosphere that reflects heat back to the earth. It is especially bad in large cities around the world. Also, more forests like in Brazil are being plowed under for cattle to feed a fast-increasing global population.
This July was determined to be the world's hottest in recorded history. Living coral reefs are down to 10% of what they were 15 years ago (and decreasing). The world's glaciers are melting as proven by the RECORDED WORLDWIDE increase in ocean levels. Scientists know what is happening, but I guess the fossil fuel industry has spent enough money to somehow convince the AVERAGE US citizen that way back Al Gore was wrong.
The only problem, this summer and the next 8 to come are PROVING Al Gore to be correct.

[jimjamuser]

Same dates last year
Aug 9 - 90 degrees
Aug 10 - 95 degrees
Aug 11 - 93 degrees
Aug 12 - 93 degrees
Aug 13 - 93 degrees

Proof positive climate is warming:
Same 5 days this year Vs last year are projected to be +8.6 degrees higher.
I could not find the same 5 days data from 200 years ago.
It is pretty obvious that Global Warming exists and is here to stay and increase for around 7 years. The only hope is General Motors expects 30% of its new car sales in 2027 to be fully electric. Another hopeful sign is the increased popularity of E-Bikes.
In the future, we will know when the Earth will start healing and temperatures will return to normal - several years after you stop hearing ICE lawnmowers and ICE golf carts cruising past your home. I wonder - can we live long enough.

[jimjamuser]

OK, so which is it? Our increased warming began 150 years ago with the industrial revolution, or 2,000 years ago????? You're contradicting yourself.
But don't worry, your nieces and their children won't have to deal with it, not unless they live to be 25,000 years old.
The 4 1/2 million year date is the beginning or our current ice age. There have been numerous ice ages prior to this. And during this time, there are 70-120,000 year cycles of glaciation and interglacial thaws driven by the power of the sun, Earth's orbit and changes in Earth's axis, among other things. Currently we are 20,000 years into a warming cycle. None of it has anything to do with fossil fuels. This is why the 4 1/2 million years mark is relevant--it explains where our climate came from and why we are here today.
Are we accelerating the warming??? Maybe, but there isn't enough data nor any conclusive proof. Are the alarmists correct? Maybe, only time will tell. But that time frame is measured in millennia, not the lifetime of your grand-nieces.
150 years ago with the Industrial Revolution, there was not enough population on earth and not enough ICE vehicles to create an upper atmosphere reflecting layer of CO2. Whole forests were NOT being cut down for cattle to feed an overpopulated earth.
Today we have all those problems caused by excess heat on Earth. The excess heat is even causing psychological problems and increased crime and murders in the heat domes of big cities. The biggest problem is that the PROBLEM is and HAS been ignored for TOO long and now in the HEAT of this summer, it is biting us BAD !

[golfing eagles]

The last 10 years are the important ones for man-made increasing global warming, which is the opinion of over 99% of climate scientists. The increasing world population and increasing use of CO2-releasing ICE vehicles have created a heat shield in the upper atmosphere that reflects heat back to the earth. It is especially bad in large cities around the world. Also, more forests like in Brazil are being plowed under for cattle to feed a fast-increasing global population.
This July was determined to be the world's hottest in recorded history. Living coral reefs are down to 10% of what they were 15 years ago (and decreasing). The world's glaciers are melting as proven by the RECORDED WORLDWIDE increase in ocean levels. Scientists know what is happening, but I guess the fossil fuel industry has spent enough money to somehow convince the AVERAGE US citizen that way back Al Gore was wrong.
The only problem, this summer and the next 8 to come are PROVING Al Gore to be correct.

Actually, proving that person "correct" is a much bigger problem than you imagine. Since he claimed the polar ice caps would all be gone by the year 2010, and it is now 2023 and they are substantially unchanged, that ship has sailed.

As far as the rest of the nonsense in that post goes, just about every statement was wrong. I particularly like how the previous thoroughly debunked "95% of climatologists" has now grown to "over 99%" (well, at least in the vivid imagination of some)

Some glaciers are melting, some are growing, and CO2 is actually at a relative historically low level in the atmosphere. But here's the good news----if it wasn't for erroneous content, you post would have no content at all :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[golfing eagles]

It is pretty obvious that Global Warming exists and is here to stay and increase for around 7 years. The only hope is General Motors expects 30% of its new car sales in 2027 to be fully electric. Another hopeful sign is the increased popularity of E-Bikes.
In the future, we will know when the Earth will start healing and temperatures will return to normal - several years after you stop hearing ICE lawnmowers and ICE golf carts cruising past your home. I wonder - can we live long enough.

More nonsense

[golfing eagles]

150 years ago with the Industrial Revolution, there was not enough population on earth and not enough ICE vehicles to create an upper atmosphere reflecting layer of CO2. Whole forests were NOT being cut down for cattle to feed an overpopulated earth.
Today we have all those problems caused by excess heat on Earth. The excess heat is even causing psychological problems and increased crime and murders in the heat domes of big cities. The biggest problem is that the PROBLEM is and HAS been ignored for TOO long and now in the HEAT of this summer, it is biting us BAD !

Now that post is TOOOOOOOO Funny:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

It was pretty hot in the 1930's, remember the dust bowl, maybe even hotter than today, but the crime rate was much lower except for a few bank robbers. How about placing the blame for crime squarely where it belongs----bad/no parenting, no instilling a moral compass in children, and no respect for authority. Climate change????What a laugh.

[bcsnave]

I just plotted temps from 1895 - 2022....contrary to what everyone wants you to believe...we are not boiling

Plotted July temps 1895 to 2022
Plotted Avg Annual Temp 1895 - 2022

looking at the standard deviation it is not significant

Temperature - Florida Climate Center (https://climatecenter.fsu.edu/products-services/data/statewide-averages/temperature)

[fdpaq0580]

Ditto. There is no climate change crisis -- just a climate education crisis.

Actually, there is both.

[fdpaq0580]

And……..?

Just thought you would like to know. Your welcome.

[fdpaq0580]

Yes! Absolutely look at that. But you have to look at it for 2 or 3 or 4000 years, not the last 20 or 50 or 100. Projections based on 20 years of data are WORTHLESS. (unless you are pushing a false narrative that will enrich a few)

Just discovered a small lump (tumor?) in my colon. Possible indication that something is wrong. So, do I jump on this and deal with it? Or do I follow your advice from above about another potentially life threatening situation and just " look at it for 2 or 3 or 4000 years?" Maybe if we just look the other way it will disappear.
Projections are just one of many tools. Gathering and studying information, real scientifically gathered information, studied by experts in the field, upgrading the projections as new information comes in. That is why the great majority of scientists agree that mankind has played a significant roll in exacerbating climate change.
Sorry. I truly wish it wasn't so, but on this you and others who claim the current climate change is "business as usual", are wrong.

[golfing eagles]

Just discovered a small lump (tumor?) in my colon. Possible indication that something is wrong. So, do I jump on this and deal with it? Or do I follow your advice from above about another potentially life threatening situation and just " look at it for 2 or 3 or 4000 years?" Maybe if we just look the other way it will disappear.
Projections are just one of many tools. Gathering and studying information, real scientifically gathered information, studied by experts in the field, upgrading the projections as new information comes in. That is why the great majority of scientists agree that mankind has played a significant roll in exacerbating climate change.
Sorry. I truly wish it wasn't so, but on this you and others who claim the current climate change is "business as usual", are wrong.

Absolutely ridiculous analogy. Human life spans are 80+ years at best, might be as short as 6 months with a colonic neoplasm. It only takes a few days to gather the data needed
Our climate runs in 70-120,000 year cycles. Only data over thousands of years can be predictive of the future

Classic apples and oranges. So sorry that the climate change alarmists are WRONG

[sounding]

As a “lay person” when it comes to weather and climate it’s best for me to leave it to the “experts” in that field. I only know for sure that it’s more complicated than I can discern. When 95% of scientists say one thing and 5% another, not having studied the subject, I go with the 95%. But to each his own.

That's a "I'm not smart enough to look at data" reply - where you forfeit your future to others - including scamsters. Scientists are way overrated - plus anyone with a desire to look for, and analyze data, can be a scientist. For example, Galileo was an inventor. So ... here is some data ... can you see out-of-control global warming?

[fdpaq0580]

As a “lay person” when it comes to weather and climate it’s best for me to leave it to the “experts” in that field. I only know for sure that it’s more complicated than I can discern. When 95% of scientists say one thing and 5% another, not having studied the subject, I go with the 95%. But to each his own.

You got the right idea. There are always those few who will find someone to come to the medicine show and believe the spiel and buy the snake oil.

[Bill14564]

That's a "I'm not smart enough to look at data" reply - where you forfeit your future to others - including scamsters. Scientists are way overrated - plus anyone with a desire to look for, and analyze data, can be a scientist. For example, Galileo was an inventor. So ... here is some data ... can you see out-of-control global warming?

Ugh! Again with the cherry-picked nonsense?!

To see this data in context, try this post #67 (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/2178150-post67.html) on the January version of this thread.

[golfing eagles]

You got the right idea. There are always those few who will find someone to come to the medicine show and believe the spiel and buy the snake oil.

Correct. They are called climate change believers 😂😂😂

[fdpaq0580]

Absolutely ridiculous analogy. Human life spans are 80+ years at best, might be as short as 6 months with a colonic neoplasm. It only takes a few days to gather the data needed
Our climate runs in 70-120,000 year cycles. Only data over thousands of years can be predictive of the future

Classic apples and oranges. So sorry that the climate change alarmists are WRONG

Sorry you dismissed it so quickly. The point is to start now rather than wait and "see" what happens next, when the team of experts has already figured out what happens next. And it ain't good, in either case.

Oh, and sorry, I truly am (I have oil wells and they aren't pumping). I know the truth is inconvenient, but mankind is making global warming worse. But, y'all stay the course.

[golfing eagles]

Sorry you dismissed it so quickly. The point is to start now rather than wait and "see" what happens next, when the team of experts has already figured out what happens next. And it ain't good, in either case.

Oh, and sorry, I truly am (I have oil wells and they aren't pumping). I know the truth is inconvenient, but mankind is making global warming worse. But, y'all stay the course.

Wow. Is that regular or extra strength Kool aid in your sippy cup???

[fdpaq0580]

Correct. They are called climate change believers 😂😂😂

Oh, you are far to clever for me. But, you are still wrong.

[Taltarzac725]

A Question of Weather Quiz - Weather Explanations | Environment | 10 Questions (https://www.funtrivia.com/quiz/scitech/a-question-of-weather-413424.html)

A little introduction to science and weather from FunTrivia. Which probably has scientists writing some Quizzes.

[fdpaq0580]

Wow. Is that regular or extra strength Kool aid in your sippy cup???

Kool aid is for kids. My cup is glass and holds a total of 25 yo single malt.........when the mood strikes

[golfing eagles]

Kool aid is for kids. My cup is glass and holds a total of 25 yo single malt.........when the mood strikes

Now you're making sense!:wine:

[eyc234]

:blahblahblah: :blahblahblah: :blahblahblah: :sigh: :loco:

[fdpaq0580]

Now you're making sense!:wine:

I knew I liked you!

[golfing eagles]

I knew I liked you!

Hey, anyone who likes 25 year old single malt scotch can’t be all that bad. Besides, it’s not like anyone on this thread will be around to see who wins the climate change debate. And if the flood waters come in the very near future, I’ll toast your win as we float in the SS Villages lifeboat

[jimjamuser]

[QUOTE=rustyp;2243277]:a20:



[QUOTE=rustyp;2243277]:a20:


THIS is the thread. You referenced , by quoting, my response that included a POSTSCRIPT, clearly highlighted. Then you must have some sort of cognitive break by responding to my OP. I understand your confusion.

So to answer the question you intended, rather than the nonsense you actually posted, I made the OP not to dispute that we are currently in a warming cycle, but to question whether human activity has anything to do with it, while pointing out the incredibly obvious push of the narrative every day.
"To question whether human activity has anything to do with it". Well, there is a simple answer to that - 99% of Climate Scientists say that human activity IS causing Global Warming. That is enough for me. There are also observable reasons to believe this. One obvious thing that is hard to avoid is that the absolute temperature right here today is close to 100 deg F. July was officially determined to be the world's hottest since records were 1st kept. Living coral are down to 10% in recent years - they are 90% dead and next year will be warmer, and the next for at least 7 more years and the ocean CO2 content and the upper atmosphere WILL continue to INCREASE.
And WHY you may ask has this happened? World population has doubled in recent years. More people equals more Internal Combustion engines in cars and industrial use. Therefore, more fossil fuel use, therefore more CO2 released. Trees and plants absorb CO2, but the greater world population requires more and more trees to be cut down. Think about the Amazon rainforest becoming more like a desert. All these changes have INCREASED more rapidly than even Climate Scientists were predicting. Now, rapid changes have happened in the last 10 years.

[Taltarzac725]

The science seems fairly clear-cut with this matter. Cannot see why it would be even controversial.

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2243286][QUOTE=rustyp;2243277]:a20:




"To question whether human activity has anything to do with it". Well, there is a simple answer to that - 99% of Climate Scientists say that human activity IS causing Global Warming. That is enough for me. There are also observable reasons to believe this. One obvious thing that is hard to avoid is that the absolute temperature right here today is close to 100 deg F. July was officially determined to be the world's hottest since records were 1st kept. Living coral are down to 10% in recent years - they are 90% dead and next year will be warmer, and the next for at least 7 more years and the ocean CO2 content and the upper atmosphere WILL continue to INCREASE.
And WHY you may ask has this happened? World population has doubled in recent years. More people equals more Internal Combustion engines in cars and industrial use. Therefore, more fossil fuel use, therefore more CO2 released. Trees and plants absorb CO2, but the greater world population requires more and more trees to be cut down. Think about the Amazon rainforest becoming more like a desert. All these changes have INCREASED more rapidly than even Climate Scientists were predicting. Now, rapid changes have happened in the last 10 years.

[rustyp]

Are we onto scotch now ? Pardon me while I light a fire in the fireplace tonight and take a sip to offset the chill. High today of 72 degrees F. I'll need to ponder on what a SS Village lifeboat is. Women and children first.

[sounding]

The science seems fairly clear-cut with this matter. Cannot see why it would be even controversial.

[QUOTE=jimjamuser;2243748][QUOTE=golfing eagles;2243286]

Sorry. It's all alarmism ... just like the little ice age scare of the 1970s. We are still in a 9-year cooling trend ...

[jimjamuser]

I Remember in HS Al Gore said there would be a coming Ice Age. Remember?
The hottest temperature in the US was recorded in 1913 in death Valley. I’m sure that was because of the internal combustion engine.🙄🙄😂
This whole climate agenda is about control. We could stop every bit of greenhouse gas, and it would accomplish nothing compared to what China and India is doing.
What scares me is so many people fall for this crap.
If we (the USA) could theoretically stop all greenhouse emissions, it would help the world a lot. maybe enough to save the coral reefs and decrease the heat reflection from the HEAT DOME of CO2 in the upper atmosphere. After all, we are the # 1 GNP country in the world with the most cars and trucks, not India and China.
I only hope for a 30% decrease in emissions from the US when (in about 4 years) new car sales of electric vehicles become 30% as predicted. Also, E-bike usage would increase. And in a more perfect world, the US government would encourage the purchase of Electric golf cars and buy back and dispose of ICE golf cars. A more perfect and quieter world.

[golfing eagles]

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2243286][QUOTE=rustyp;2243277]:a20:




"To question whether human activity has anything to do with it". Well, there is a simple answer to that - 99% of Climate Scientists say that human activity IS causing Global Warming. That is enough for me. There are also observable reasons to believe this. One obvious thing that is hard to avoid is that the absolute temperature right here today is close to 100 deg F. July was officially determined to be the world's hottest since records were 1st kept. Living coral are down to 10% in recent years - they are 90% dead and next year will be warmer, and the next for at least 7 more years and the ocean CO2 content and the upper atmosphere WILL continue to INCREASE.
And WHY you may ask has this happened? World population has doubled in recent years. More people equals more Internal Combustion engines in cars and industrial use. Therefore, more fossil fuel use, therefore more CO2 released. Trees and plants absorb CO2, but the greater world population requires more and more trees to be cut down. Think about the Amazon rainforest becoming more like a desert. All these changes have INCREASED more rapidly than even Climate Scientists were predicting. Now, rapid changes have happened in the last 10 years.

You can repeat that bogus 99% number over and over again until the cows come home, but it is still a lie

[jimjamuser]

China is building new coal mines at record speeds (one a week I've read) and has been excused from the climate accords. Much of Africa and South America are following suit. Their combined land mass makes up a lot more mass than the United States. Some of the nutty things this country is doing in pursuit of saving the planet are meaningless. Without the entire world working together, all the money we are throwing at climate change is a waste.
The money SAVED by climate change investment would be be greater than just the increased A/C usage as the planet warms increasingly in the next 7 years. The heat domes over the US medium and large cities COSTS citizens large amounts of money. Heat increases crime. Heat increases mental problems. Heat causes workers to be less efficient and take more breaks. Heat increases physical and medical problems for citizens.
Every time a US citizen buys an E-vehicle, they are being patriotic and helping the US with what is becoming its biggest problem.

[jimjamuser]

Once again, that 95% number has been debunked over and over ad nauseum.

Now, to get a handle on what the majority of these experts are saying, go back to a climate thread about 3 weeks ago. A TOTV member has a son who is a climatologist at a major university. He made the mistake of suggesting that global warming might not be due to human activity. From that point on he was professionally ruined--he couldn't get any grants, he was denied tenure and was unable to have any of his work published. This story has been repeated all over the world as powers that be stifle any opinion contrary to "chicken little, the man-made climate crisis is imminent and going to kill our grandchildren (unless we pony up $131 TRILLION to "combat" it).

So, while not 95%, it is a majority. But like most of, when a gun is held to our head, we will say what the person holding the gun wants us to say.
The story about the University Climatologist is an N of one statistically, even if true. The latest statistics that I have read said that over 99% of Climatologists agree with Global Warming. That is amazing and total agreement that man-made warming is a FACT.

[golfing eagles]

The story about the University Climatologist is an N of one statistically, even if true. The latest statistics that I have read said that over 99% of Climatologists agree with Global Warming. That is amazing and total agreement that man-made warming is a FACT.

Do I have to start a count of how many times you repeat that 99% lie?

[jimjamuser]

More nonsense
It is not nonsense that GM expects that 30% of their new vehicle sales to be ELECTRIC. The rest of the post can be disagreed with, but is not nonsense.

[jimjamuser]

Now that post is TOOOOOOOO Funny:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

It was pretty hot in the 1930's, remember the dust bowl, maybe even hotter than today, but the crime rate was much lower except for a few bank robbers. How about placing the blame for crime squarely where it belongs----bad/no parenting, no instilling a moral compass in children, and no respect for authority. Climate change????What a laugh.
The 1930's was a whole different world. What was the population of the US.......maybe 60 million people. What was the world population.........not enough to cause global warming. Most Americans were farmers and had no mental problems caused by heat and overcrowding in cities.

[jimjamuser]

Do I have to start a count of how many times you repeat that 99% lie?
The 99% was simply the last that I read on the subject. How about if I have an assignment to read up on the subject to verify the %? And others can read about the horrendous bleaching of the coral reefs caused by the CO2 increase in the oceans. And others can research the CO2 increases in recent years in the upper atmosphere.
Incidentally, the HEAT related increased mental problems in the US is written about in today's NY Times.

[sounding]

If we (the USA) could theoretically stop all greenhouse emissions, it would help the world a lot. maybe enough to save the coral reefs and decrease the heat reflection from the HEAT DOME of CO2 in the upper atmosphere. After all, we are the # 1 GNP country in the world with the most cars and trucks, not India and China.
I only hope for a 30% decrease in emissions from the US when (in about 4 years) new car sales of electric vehicles become 30% as predicted. Also, E-bike usage would increase. And in a more perfect world, the US government would encourage the purchase of Electric golf cars and buy back and dispose of ICE golf cars. A more perfect and quieter world.

The coral reefs are at an all time high over the past 37 years -- thanks to increasing CO2 and global warming. They need CO2 to grow their protective reefs. Corals were much more diverse when the the climate was warmer with higher CO2 levels. Plus they love warm water -- which is why they live mostly along the equator.

[Bill14564]

Do I have to start a count of how many times you repeat that 99% lie?

It would be better if you cited a reputable review that disputed it.

But sure, 99% is probably not accurate. It could be 98.6% or 99.2% or 97.1% but it almost certainly is not exactly 99%. From a quick review of what google wanted to tell me tonight, I couldn't find anything in the last five years that found less than 97% and even results back to 2014 seemed to agree with >90%.

But you can show a different result?

[Bill14564]

The coral reefs are at an all time high over the past 37 years -- thanks to increasing CO2 and global warming. They need CO2 to grow their protective reefs. Corals were much more diverse when the the climate was warmer with higher CO2 levels. Plus they love warm water -- which is why they live mostly along the equator.

Care to share the rest of the story? The part where the majority of the new coral is fast-growing coral that is particularly vulnerable to bleaching and other damage.

Yeah, we chopped all the old growth forest but look for yourself, with the pine and the grass the area is still green.

[JMintzer]

The last 10 years are the important ones for man-made increasing global warming, which is the opinion of over 99% of climate scientists. The increasing world population and increasing use of CO2-releasing ICE vehicles have created a heat shield in the upper atmosphere that reflects heat back to the earth. It is especially bad in large cities around the world. Also, more forests like in Brazil are being plowed under for cattle to feed a fast-increasing global population.
This July was determined to be the world's hottest in recorded history. Living coral reefs are down to 10% of what they were 15 years ago (and decreasing). The world's glaciers are melting as proven by the RECORDED WORLDWIDE increase in ocean levels. Scientists know what is happening, but I guess the fossil fuel industry has spent enough money to somehow convince the AVERAGE US citizen that way back Al Gore was wrong.
The only problem, this summer and the next 8 to come are PROVING Al Gore to be correct.

https://media.tenor.com/ytDtlG2gxLsAAAAC/its-alive-young-frankenstein.gif

Where ya' been?

[sounding]

Care to share the rest of the story? The part where the majority of the new coral is fast-growing coral that is particularly vulnerable to bleaching and other damage.

Yeah, we chopped all the old growth forest but look for yourself, with the pine and the grass the area is still green.

Here's he rest of the story. PS... bleaching is as normal as wardrobe changing. We change for seasons as corals corals do for many reasons. https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2022/08/Ridd-Record-Coral-GBR.pdf?mc_cid=4682239443&mc_eid=2757d1864c

[JMintzer]

Do I have to start a count of how many times you repeat that 99% lie?

Here's a Forbes article explaining why that (often claimed) # is incorrect...

Fact Checking The Claim Of 97% Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change (https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2016/12/14/fact-checking-the-97-consensus-on-anthropogenic-climate-change/?sh=559d9a591157)

"This public discussion was started by Oreskes’ brief 2004 article, which included an analysis of 928 papers containing the keywords “global climate change.” The article says “none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position” of anthropogenic global warming. Although this article makes no claim to a specific number, it is routinely described as indicating 100% agreement and used as support for the 97% figure."

[JMintzer]

It is not nonsense that GM expects that 30% of their new vehicle sales to be ELECTRIC. The rest of the post can be disagreed with, but is not nonsense.

No, they expect 30% of their LINE to be electric vehicles. They say nothing about sales #s...

[JMintzer]

The 1930's was a whole different world. What was the population of the US.......maybe 60 million people. What was the world population.........not enough to cause global warming. Most Americans were farmers and had no mental problems caused by heat and overcrowding in cities.

123 Million in 1930...
127 Million in 1935...
132 Million in 1940...

But why let facts ruin a good argument?

[JMintzer]

It would be better if you cited a reputable review that disputed it.

But sure, 99% is probably not accurate. It could be 98.6% or 99.2% or 97.1% but it almost certainly is not exactly 99%. From a quick review of what google wanted to tell me tonight, I couldn't find anything in the last five years that found less than 97% and even results back to 2014 seemed to agree with >90%.

But you can show a different result?

The Forbes article I posted above...

[Bill14564]

The Forbes article I posted above...

... is consistent with what I wrote (it was one that I looked at earlier)

[Bill14564]

Here's he rest of the story. PS... bleaching is as normal as wardrobe changing. We change for seasons as corals corals do for many reasons. https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2022/08/Ridd-Record-Coral-GBR.pdf?mc_cid=4682239443&mc_eid=2757d1864c

The article argues that there is a record high coverage - I did not dispute that.

I wrote that quality matters too - the article did not address that.

The last page of the article, the list of "climate change is bogus" articles, was quite enlightening. Not exactly an unbiased scientific organization.

Stick with weather - climatology is difficult and marine biology is an entirely different field

[sounding]

The article argues that there is a record high coverage - I did not dispute that.

I wrote that quality matters too - the article did not address that.

The last page of the article, the list of "climate change is bogus" articles, was quite enlightening. Not exactly an unbiased scientific organization.

Stick with weather - your climatologist chops are lacking and your marine biologist "expertise" seems to be worse.

Attacking the person is a favorite tool of climate alarmists, which is not how science works. Science is based on data - not rhetoric. Here's the data. Notice there is no coral growing in the flaming hot polar oceans. They love warm water and CO2.

[sounding]

I spent the last two weeks traveling around Iceland. Yes, the climate is changing.

Man caused? Doubtful.

We had a mini ice age 500 years. At one time, not long ago, Iceland was completely under glacial ice. That ice has been receding long before man stepped foot in Iceland and even Europe. Fossil remains also show teaches of warm weather plants and animals from thousands and millions of years ago.

Sometimes climate change is influenced by plate tectonics. Other times by astronomical events. Sometimes by volcanic action. None of those can be stopped by human activity.

Best we can do is adapt. Darwin told us that it's survival of the fittest!

Ditto -- and the snow skiers are happily adapting this year ... Mammoth Mountain Finishes Second Longest Ski Season Ever - Cold Weather Report (http://coldweatherreport.com/2023/08/10/mammoth-mountain-finishes-second-longest-ski-season-ever/)

[Two Bills]

Talk about laying on the scare factor.

UK Met office has just issued "Excessive heat warnings" for many parts of UK.
Temps of 80f+ are forecast.
Many elderly will be at risk!

Forecasters earlier this week predicted that a "pulse of heat" would ravage Britain with some predicting temperatures could reach a maximum of 30C. (86f)

Can't wait for winter if temp. drops below freezing! :ohdear:

[golfing eagles]

Talk about laying on the scare factor.

UK Met office has just issued "Excessive heat warnings" for many parts of UK.
Temps of 80f+ are forecast.
Many elderly will be at risk!

Forecasters earlier this week predicted that a "pulse of heat" would ravage Britain with some predicting temperatures could reach a maximum of 30C. (86f)

Can't wait for winter if temp. drops below freezing! :ohdear:

86F "ravaging" Great Britain????
Looks like British media has joined the fake weather/climate party
Please send some of that 86F our way---I'm sure our media will find a way to blame a 10F drop in temp on global warming.

[sounding]

Talk about laying on the scare factor.

UK Met office has just issued "Excessive heat warnings" for many parts of UK.
Temps of 80f+ are forecast.
Many elderly will be at risk!

Forecasters earlier this week predicted that a "pulse of heat" would ravage Britain with some predicting temperatures could reach a maximum of 30C. (86f)

Can't wait for winter if temp. drops below freezing! :ohdear:

Ireland was unusually cold - for July ... Cold July Leaves Ireland Hoping Summer Returns - Cold Weather Report (http://coldweatherreport.com/2023/08/11/cold-july-leaves-ireland-hoping-summer-returns/)

[eyc234]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/post-uses-flawed-data-analysis-to-wrongly-claim-climate-change-is-a-scam-fact-check/ar-AA1f7bEq?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=4e98ff7e63584a31a654692f1fe7e693&ei=62

You can find and regurgitate words from both sides of this debate. Was taught from youngest days to prepare for the worst and hope for the best. To say that nothing is happening when it clearly is, sticking your head in the sand and then whining when you need help. There are things that can be done to mitigate the impact on human suffering and we should do them.

[golfing eagles]

Ireland was unusually cold - for July ... Cold July Leaves Ireland Hoping Summer Returns - Cold Weather Report (http://coldweatherreport.com/2023/08/11/cold-july-leaves-ireland-hoping-summer-returns/)

But after all, isn't that due to global warming???? I mean, glaciers are melting due to global warming, glaciers are growing due to global warming. I didn't make one lousy birdie until the 15th hole yesterday---that must be due to global warming as well :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Bill14564]

I just plotted temps from 1895 - 2022....contrary to what everyone wants you to believe...we are not boiling

Plotted July temps 1895 to 2022
Plotted Avg Annual Temp 1895 - 2022

looking at the standard deviation it is not significant

Temperature - Florida Climate Center (https://climatecenter.fsu.edu/products-services/data/statewide-averages/temperature)

Of course, a standard deviation that is not significant supports the observation that temps are rising in our area.

[Bay Kid]

Twilight Zone did a show about extreme cold then ended with extreme heat.

[golfing eagles]

Twilight Zone did a show about extreme cold then ended with extreme heat.

Yep---science fiction, just like the narrative the climate change alarmists and their acolytes are cramming down our throats.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Ireland was unusually cold - for July ... Cold July Leaves Ireland Hoping Summer Returns - Cold Weather Report (http://coldweatherreport.com/2023/08/11/cold-july-leaves-ireland-hoping-summer-returns/)

just got back from Ireland, first time so not sure, but according to the locals june had visitors getting sun tans, which was totally unexpected. . . (clear skies, little rain, not heat!)

however, weather .com irish weather forecasts were only good for about a day ahead. two days ahead was 50/50, and farther than that was ignored as swags. .

humans have recently bias, the brain can't hold all that historical data, so the recent articles are apropos

:jester:

[ThirdOfFive]

Has anyone reading this thread seen even ONE argument for or against, that they haven't seen probably hundreds of times before? I sure haven't. Not surprising, I guess. This game of Dueling Numbers convinces no one.

As Mark Twain once observed; there are three kinds of untruths: "lies, damned lies, and statistics". Statistics are the worst, because people can make them say anything they want them to say.

For myself, I'll continue to live my life the way I always have, enjoying my toys and the ability to play with them unhindered, and will vote for people who tend toward common sense rather than hysteria. Still possible (for the present, anyway) in America.

[rustyp]

Any tee times available this afternoon ?

[JMintzer]

"Oh, I used to be disgusted
And now I try to be amused
But since their wings have got rusted
You know, the angels wanna wear my red shoes..."


- Elvis Costello

[Jim1mack]

The media is our worst enemy for all the points you make. We stopped watching the nightly news years ago and have never watched any of those entertainment shows that claim to report the news. We still stay informed but without all the hyperbolly. It’s refreshing.

[jimjamuser]

The coral reefs are at an all time high over the past 37 years -- thanks to increasing CO2 and global warming. They need CO2 to grow their protective reefs. Corals were much more diverse when the the climate was warmer with higher CO2 levels. Plus they love warm water -- which is why they live mostly along the equator.
Corals in coral reefs (like all creatures, even humans) have a temperature range that they can exist in. Those temperatures have been exceeded this summer (this past July is officially the hottest worldwide on record) on both land and ocean. 90 % of coral worldwide has died in a time frame of about 20 years. And it WILL get worse as the climate scientists are predicting, at least, 7 years of increasing planet warming.
Veteran reef divers today come out of the water crying because of the dead, bleached coral. This is caused by excess CO2 in the ocean and in the upper atmosphere, which is caused by the increased earth's population needing ICE vehicles to move around using fossil fuels. Also, vehicles used in agriculture and industry.
One small recent fact that is appropriate to this discussion is that Orlando has for the 1st time recorded temps of 98 deg for 5 days recently, today maybe the 6th. Global warming increased SLOWLY after Al Gore tried to make the US aware of it. Now today, it IS HERE right in Orlando like staring into the barrel of a robber's gun - it is THAT obvious. Many will pretend that the robber does not exist. Just go outside today and walk or jog around the block in the afternoon - notice that you will come back with severe sweating. Just being outside today here is considered medically dangerous. 20 years ago do you remember the TV people warning everyone to stay hydrated and everyone carrying a water bottle.......NO. That intuitively tells you that Global Warming has increased in recent years. And next summer will be worse and so on. The only possible solution is a rapid trend to electric vehicles in the next 4 years.

[jimjamuser]

Attacking the person is a favorite tool of climate alarmists, which is not how science works. Science is based on data - not rhetoric. Here's the data. Notice there is no coral growing in the flaming hot polar oceans. They love warm water and CO2.
Corals might "LOVE" warm water, but they may NOT love excessively HOT water (which is killing them). People would like a hot tub with 104 deg F water in it. But, they will NOT like to jump into a hot tub at 120 deg F. As far as people go, the Police know that murders and crime increase in the summer as the cities HEAT up. Mental health problems increase with heat. Hospitals are now filled with heat stroke patients. Ask yourselves, what will it be like in 4 years as these hot summers get increasingly HOTTER?

[golfing eagles]

Corals in coral reefs (like all creatures, even humans) have a temperature range that they can exist in. Those temperatures have been exceeded this summer (this past July is officially the hottest worldwide on record) on both land and ocean. 90 % of coral worldwide has died in a time frame of about 20 years. And it WILL get worse as the climate scientists are predicting, at least, 7 years of increasing planet warming.
Veteran reef divers today come out of the water crying because of the dead, bleached coral. This is caused by excess CO2 in the ocean and in the upper atmosphere, which is caused by the increased earth's population needing ICE vehicles to move around using fossil fuels. Also, vehicles used in agriculture and industry.
One small recent fact that is appropriate to this discussion is that Orlando has for the 1st time recorded temps of 98 deg for 5 days recently, today maybe the 6th. Global warming increased SLOWLY after Al Gore tried to make the US aware of it. Now today, it IS HERE right in Orlando like staring into the barrel of a robber's gun - it is THAT obvious. Many will pretend that the robber does not exist. Just go outside today and walk or jog around the block in the afternoon - notice that you will come back with severe sweating. Just being outside today here is considered medically dangerous. 20 years ago do you remember the TV people warning everyone to stay hydrated and everyone carrying a water bottle.......NO. That intuitively tells you that Global Warming has increased in recent years. And next summer will be worse and so on. The only possible solution is a rapid trend to electric vehicles in the next 4 years.

Amazing. One note Johnny continues on.


90 % of coral worldwide has died in a time frame of about 20 years.

Love to see proof of that claim. And I mean legitimate proof, not something from "Chicken Little the Earth is Warming monthly"


98 deg for 5 days recently, today maybe the 6th

Yes! 5 days out of the last 4 1/2 million years. Sounds like "proof" to me:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Al Gore tried to make the US aware of it.

To paraphrase the Bard---"Global Warming is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury but signifying nothing"

20 years ago do you remember the TV people warning everyone to stay hydrated and everyone carrying a water bottle.......NO.

20 years ago do you remember everyone carrying a cell phone? NO---cell phones must be causing global warming (Post hoc ergo propter hoc):1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

The only possible solution is a rapid trend to electric vehicles in the next 4 years.

Yep---a solution waiting for an actual problem

[golfing eagles]

Corals might "LOVE" warm water, but they may NOT love excessively HOT water (which is killing them). People would like a hot tub with 104 deg F water in it. But, they will NOT like to jump into a hot tub at 120 deg F. As far as people go, the Police know that murders and crime increase in the summer as the cities HEAT up. Mental health problems increase with heat. Hospitals are now filled with heat stroke patients. Ask yourselves, what will it be like in 4 years as these hot summers get increasingly HOTTER?

Really????

From Harvard University School of Public Health:

Hospital admissions for heat stroke declining in the U.S.

The number of hospital admissions for heat stroke has declined significantly in the United States in recent years, according to a new study from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health published in the journal Environmental Health. In one of the largest studies of its kind, researchers examined data from more than 23 million Medicare beneficiaries in 1,916 U.S. counties.

Care to modify your claim?????

[Taltarzac725]

Really????

From Harvard University School of Public Health:

Hospital admissions for heat stroke declining in the U.S.

The number of hospital admissions for heat stroke has declined significantly in the United States in recent years, according to a new study from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health published in the journal Environmental Health. In one of the largest studies of its kind, researchers examined data from more than 23 million Medicare beneficiaries in 1,916 U.S. counties.

Care to modify your claim?????


With climate change, health care providers should be more mindful of heat-related illness, doctors say | CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/27/health/heat-health-care-more-proactive/index.html)

This is rather recent.

[jimjamuser]

Any tee times available this afternoon ?
I can tell you one thing, I see no tennis players out on the courts in the afternoons here. And very seldom do I see pickleball players in the afternoon. Which is actually smart. Would it not be nice if the village's gyms allowed tennis and pickleball players to use the A/C, which is just wasted on non-school hours and days?