“Year of Global Cooling”

Geophysicist David Demming details the weather events of 2007 that make it mighty difficult to take seriously the sky-is-falling alarmism of the global warming industry.

Summarizing: Record cold weather in the southern hemisphere . . . late freezes in the U.S. that cost billions in agricultural losses . . . record low temperatures throughout the northern hemisphere so far this winter . . . hundreds of deaths directly related to cold weather. Demming names the dates, the places, the numbers.

Here in Kansas, we can personally attest to this frigid climate pattern. We’ve not yet reached January, and already we’ve had three four major snowstorms and a major ice storm, the latter leaving thousands of homes without power. As Demming noted about our predicament here in the Midwest:

Left in the dark and cold, Oklahomans rushed out to buy electric generators powered by gasoline, not solar cells. No one seemed particularly concerned about the welfare of polar bears, penguins or walruses. Fossil fuels don’t seem so awful when you’re in the cold and dark.

Of course, as Demming admits, none of these facts will deter the global warming true believers. They can it explain it all.

In 2005, a Canadian Greenpeace representative explained “global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean wetter.” In other words, all weather variations are evidence for global warming. I can’t make this stuff up.

In the long term, I have faith in the common sense of the common people. When millions of folks personally experience this kind of weather, they tend not to take seriously the pompous pronouncements of the bureaucrats who want to re-engineer our economy in the name of saving the planet.

The climate is what it is. Our task is to learn how to adapt to it.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to go shovel snow out of my driveway.

UPDATE: Even the mainstream media is beginning to question the prevailing wisdom. Former BBC science editor David Whitehouse (PhD in astrophysics) asks “has global warming stopped?” After examining the evidence, he believes there is definitely room for more debate on this subject.

So we are led to the conclusion that either the hypothesis of carbon dioxide induced global warming holds but its effects are being modified in what seems to be an improbable though not impossible way, or, and this really is heresy according to some, the working hypothesis does not stand the test of data.

True science will allow–no, insist— this debate to move forward. Only dogmatic ideologues will attempt to stifle it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s