Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Opinion


VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Cooling is 'not evidence that global warming is slowing'

My relatives in New England are fighting their way out from under a giant ice storm. Here in Las Vegas it's been snowing all week, several weeks earlier than our usual one-day-a-year photo op of snow and icicles sparkling one of our palm-bedecked golf courses before melting away by afternoon. The National Weather Service calls it "a rare snow event."

Why? It's getting colder. 2008 was the coolest year in a decade.


Most Popular Stories
  • EDITORIAL: Terrorism on trial
  • EDITORIAL: A pre-9/11 approach to terror
  • SHERMAN FREDERICK: Call evil by its rightful name
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: What stops mass murderers? A gun
  • LETTERS: Public-sector workers are still doing well
  • LETTERS: Harry Reid: Working hard for all Americans
  • EDITORIAL: 'That's the ticket!'
  • Our politicians are the greatest, all right
  • LETTERS: A giant octopus threatens rural Nevada
  • LETTERS: America should try terrorists in open court




  • The American mainstream press seem to know "team players" don't mention such inconvenient developments, but in the U.K., the esteemed Guardian reports, "This year is set to be the coolest since 2000, according to a preliminary estimate of global average temperature that is due to be released next week by the Met Office. The global average for 2008 should come in close to 14.3C, which is 0.14C below the average temperature for 2001-07."

    How stupid does this make politicians such as Barack Obama and the other suckers who have fallen for the "global warming" hoax as they race to say, "Never mind"?

    Actually, they haven't missed a beat. These guys are so "scientific" that the evidence of their own eyes and overcoats has become irrelevant. They now contend global cooling is just further proof of global warming. Honest.

    So-called "climate scientists" insist "The relatively chilly temperatures compared with recent years are not evidence that global warming is slowing," The Guardian reports.

    Um ... Earth's cooling doesn't mean the Earth is cooling?

    "Absolutely not," responds Dr. Peter Stott, the manager of understanding and attributing climate change at the Met Office's Hadley Centre. "If we are going to understand climate change we need to look at long-term trends."

    You might want to pause and savor that for a moment. This is the gang who keep telling us, "The Debate is over! Dissent no longer allowed! Man-made global warming is going to ruin the Earth!"

    Yet they now say cooling "is not evidence that global warming is slowing," and that, "If we are going to understand climate change we need to look at long-term trends."

    If we are "going" to understand climate change? Like ... in the future?

    Sure, the mean temperature may still go up for a few more years before it plummets. So? None of the great climate cycles of the past needed us to burn coal in our power plants to make them happen, and there's neither evidence nor any intuitive reason to believe the tiny percentage of atmospheric carbon dioxide we now generate makes any substantial difference, either.

    When will the "Let us take over and wreck your economy so we can save you from the climate boogey-man" gang admit the earth is cooling again, and when will they admit, "OK, since cooling is worse than warming, and our own theory is that mankind can impact global temperature by what we burn, it's now your duty to hold back the Big Freeze by going out there and burning all the fossil fuels you possibly can, as fast as you can"?

    (Don't even get me started on "carbon trading," a weird scam in which the buyer acquires an invisible commodity of no earthly use to him, and both buyer and seller can benefit if they overestimate the amount being "transferred.")

    Instead, on Monday, President-Elect Obama ("Delay is no longer an option; denial is no longer an acceptable response") appointed as Secretary of Energy (a position and an office not authorized in the Constitution) Steven Chu, the confirmed global warming lunatic from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory who says coal -- the stuff that powered the industrial revolution, cheap coal which will last for centuries and which can be burned more cleanly now than ever before -- "is my worst nightmare."

    This gang still intends to effectively ban both coal-fired and nuclear power generation. Do they believe they can meet our current demand with famously costly, unreliable, and toxic wind, solar and geothermal? (Look up the by-products of geothermal energy, some time. Then look up "battery farms.") Of course not. The gap can only be closed by "conservation," they'll admit when you take a pencil and start to work the numbers.

    And what does "conservation" mean, precisely?

    They'd like us to think they mean just turning out the lights in our empty rooms, that kind of thing. But they don't.

    Mr. Obama has said it, straight out. He, the Chosen One, has had it Revealed to Him that we can no longer use 25 percent of the world's energy when we have only 5 percent of the world's population.

    This is nonsense. All mankind uses less than 1 percent of the solar energy that streams past us every hour. Is it "unfair" that the Japanese eat "more than their fair per capita share" of the world's fish?

    Are we now to be ruled by a depraved schoolchild obsessed with sharing the toys, granted the ability to carry forward that Ding-Dong School philosophy with powers reminiscent of the kid in the old "Twilight Zone" episode who could "wish people into the cornfield"?

    We should be proud that we've learned how to capture and harness the lion's share of the available energy in this system. It's not like we refused to share with others "the secret of coal" or "the secret of oil," is it? They saw how good it was; they've been racing to catch up to us ever since; that's the main reason the world has escaped the life expectancies of the Stone Age.

    There's a real world out there. Purposely, artificially impoverish the nation, force us to give up our competitive economic advantages, and we'll eventually go the way of the Carthaginians.

    The Obama gang mean for us to learn to survive at 55 degrees in the winter; and to hope the tourists will still come to Vegas when our air conditioning only lowers the temperature to 87 in the summer (assuming we can afford even that.) They plan to unionize and thus close down most of our remaining factories -- the Chinese will make us everything we need, you see; we'll pay for it with the endless bales of green coupons printed by Ben Bernanke and the Elves in the Big Hollow Tree.

    To see Mr. Obama admit "Under my plan, electricity costs will necessarily skyrocket" visit http://www.climatechangefraud.com/.

    In a Zogby exit poll, 88.4 percent of Obama voters expressed ignorance of the fact Obama said on the campaign trail that his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket. See the sample interviews at http://howobamagotelected.com/.

    Why did voters not know this? Because the mainstream press covered Wasilla, Alaska, like a glove, trying to dig up something on Sarah Palin's overdue library books. Meantime, when it turns out Barack Obama's Senate seat is for sale for a million bucks in Chicago, the press corps slaps their foreheads and exclaims in amazement: "More corruption in Chicago than there was in Wasilla?! Who would have thought to look there?! By the way, where is Obama from, anyway?"

    Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Review-Journal and author of "The Black Arrow." See www.vinsuprynowicz.com/ and http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/vin/.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 90 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    cv wrote on December 31, 2008 08:52 AM: Please everyone repeat after me "CO2 IS NOT A POLUTANT". Thank you.


    Bill Smith wrote on December 29, 2008 11:08 AM: Do you anything to offer "notacon" (I'm sure you are one) other than ad hominem attacks?


    Norman wrote on December 29, 2008 09:41 AM: We are currently enjoying the end of a warm interval (interglaciation) between ice ages. Our interglaciation is called the Holocene.

    The last interglacial (before the last ice age) was called the Eemian. The Eemian Interglacial was way hoter than today and C02 was skyrocketing.

    Modern Man was not here yet during the Eemian but if we were some Al Gore type would have been blowing hot air and blaming "human activity."


    notacon wrote on December 29, 2008 07:47 AM: Probably the most rambling, incoherent editorial that I have ever read. Vin, you should hope that the RJ continues to employ you. Otherwise, your job prospects seem very dim.


    Imre Kertesz wrote on December 29, 2008 05:14 AM: It is wonderful to find that a sane opinion is published among the religous zeal of global warming.


    Norman wrote on December 28, 2008 10:45 PM: The most under-reported story of the century:

    www.science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/23sep_solarwind.htm

    And this is not from a bogus "computer model" - This is hard scientific data.

    There is now overwhelming evidence that we are heading into global cooling as opposed to warming. The growing trend in recent years is towards record low temperatures and record snowpacks around the world. CO2 is only 0.037% of our atmosphere, amd natural water vapor causes 95% of the greenhouse effect.

    The most recent evidence of upcoming global cooling is the press release from NASA titled "Solar Wind Loses Power, Hits 50-year Low". The solar wind is down "more than 20%" and NASA says it is a "long term trend" that started "in the mid-1990s."

    In practical terms it is like mother nature is turning down the sun's thermostat and already we have "13% cooling". I think NASA's press release is the most under-reported story of the century.


    jerry wrote on December 28, 2008 09:55 AM: So if it is true that global warming causes cold spells it must also be true that drought causes precipitation,
    good, the Lake will be full by July. Oh oh, I forgot that Pat Mulroy would rather see the water from the Colorado River go straight to the ocean than see Lake Mead full. How would we remember what a bad drought we are having without that big white ring around the edge of Lake Mead.


    David wrote on December 27, 2008 03:11 AM: Try this for a more balance vew:-

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Cooling


    Antonio Sosa wrote on December 26, 2008 12:30 PM: You are right, Paul. The objective of the global warming hoax is to force us to harm ourselves in order to empower the U.N. and "progressives" (Marxists) like Obama.

    More than 31,000 American scientists have signed onto the Global Warming Petition Project. The petition states, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate…” http://www.pr-inside.com/the-petition-contains-the-signatures-of-r613239.htm

    The mainstream media, now controlled by U.S. enemies like George Soros, is NOT reporting the opinions of the THOUSANDS of scientists, perhaps the majority of scientists, who believe global warming is a hoax.


    dean wrote on December 26, 2008 12:24 PM: Ben, I was only responding to Vin's incorrect idea of equating short-term weather with climate. He is making the claim that a few years of temperatures that are below the record warm years a decade ago are proof of no climate change. I think you agree with me that his premise is completely wrong, even if you hold that CO2 emissions aren't an issue.

    Secondly, computer climate models show that the current warm temperature trend is in fact due to our CO2 emissions. Without those emissions, the climate models are much cooler in the past fifty years. The models match the climate history quite well.

    Insolation is a huge factor in the Earth's climate, as we can tell from historical record, the sunspot telescope record, combined with natural climate records like tree rings and isotope variations. But it is not driving the current warm-up. Satellite measurements are showing the Sun has been relatively constant in the present.


    Read All Comments