Here we are with record cold in the USA and the press and Mikey Mann are telling us this is global warming. The IPCC said “Occasional cold winters will continue to occur (Räisänen and Ylhaisi, 2011).” What occasional means is not clear and probably intentionally so. The last few winters have been very harsh in the USA and this year cold records are dropping nationwide, with snow further south than seen in decades. There was no prediction of colder winters by the global warming people until after the fact. Much like everything else in climate science, there’s a constant moving of the goal posts, much like Lucy in Peanuts and her football. If it’s cold, it’s global warming, if it’s warm, it’s global warming, global warming is just flat out magic. Literally.
The cold is not limited to the USA. Russia is extremely cold. There was snow on the Sahara, again. Yet, the global warming advocates cling steadfastly to the “the world is heating up” mantra. Nothing deters them from their faith in the warming and it being manmade, not natural. That is not science.
Maybe it’s time we stopped listening to these “scientists” and instead checked out the window. If it’s freezing out there, you might want to consider planning for cold, just in case the science is not settled.
I have been trying to come up with a way to explain how weather and climate are inextricably entwined. Global warming people always have said “It’s weather, not climate” until the marketing department recently came up with “extreme weather” when climate and weather were once again the same thing. When it’s warm, of course. The freezing above is just “weather”. With the “settled science”, it’s very fluid what is weather what is climate. Also, climate scientists are now claiming warming causes cold or something like that. You know, there’s feet of snow out there but it’s due to global warming. I can’t see how rational people are going to buy that, but it’s their marketing department……
Climate is actually weather and weather creates climate. Climate is just a mathematical manipulation of temperatures, etc, into an average, or some other statistic that gives the desired outcome. In fact, people often ask what the climate is like and are answered with examples of the weather.
One possible analogy to help clarify the interrelationship would be making bread. Bread, depending on the recipe, includes flour, salt, sugar, yeast and water. The separate ingredients are not bread, but put together (and baked) they ARE bread. If you then back trace from the finished product, you get the flour, salt, etc. If any ingredients are changed in quantity or type, the finished product will probably be affected. (You could call this “ingredient sensitivity”! I don’t know if there are forcings involved but could be.) This is just as changes in weather can change the numeric values of “climate”—average rainfall, average temperature, average amount of sun, etc. There really is no way to separate the two. When we’re seeing snow and freezing cold over widespread areas, there’s good reason to wonder how the “climate” is warming, not cooling. Much the same as adding a cup of sugar instead of 1/4 cup of sugar to the bread. When the bread is finished, you recognize that the ingredients have changed. Looking now at the “warming of the planet”, warming is far from apparent, irregardless of the yarn being spun by the global warming advocates. The ingredients have not changed so far as we can tell.
Please feel free to suggest other ways the weather/climate thing might be explained.