Climate Now Causes Everything!

Climate change disciples are so cute in their hysteria

(Guardian UK) Now we discover that not only are the oceans and the atmosphere conspiring against us, bringing baking temperatures, more powerful storms, floods and ever-climbing sea levels, but the crust beneath our feet seems likely to join in too.

Looking back to other periods in our planet’s history when the climate was swinging about wildly, most notably during the last ice age, it appears that far more than the weather was affected. The solid earth also became restless, with an increase in volcanic activity, earthquakes, giant submarine landslides and tsunamis. At the rate climate change is accelerating, there is every prospect that we will see a similar response from the planet, heralding not just a warmer future but also a fiery one.

Gawd-almighty, can you believe that? They really go off the deep end in order to substantiate their insanity.

But, wait, did you catch the part that said "Looking back to other periods in our planet’s history when the climate was swinging about wildly, most notably during the last ice age…"? Do the climate change hysterics actually think about what they write? On one had, the article author, Bill McGuire (who is neither a climatologist, and just happens to have a gloom and doom climate change book coming out next January), is saying that the global warming is causing a more active period of earthquakes, volcano’s, landslides, and tsunamis, and on the other hand, the same exact thing happened during the last ice age!

To put it succinctly, all those things happen during all periods of time, and have done the same going all the way back to the beginning of the Earth. Matter of fact, there have been many periods where the Earth’s natural forces have been much more active, and things have gone wonky. Heck, about 600-700 million years ago, scientists think the Earth was a ball of snow and ice. The Permian mass extinction was supposedly caused in part by massive outbreaks of vulcanism over enormous amounts of the land area of the time.

Seriously, do they think about what they say and write?

Ice-posted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Jeanette’s Celebrity Corner, Right Truth, Inside the Northwest Territory, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, Conservative Thoughts, Allie Is Wired, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Wyvern dreams, High Desert Wanderer, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

21 Responses to “Climate Now Causes Everything!”

  1. ortho says:

    Great post! Many journalists, intellectuals, and politicians blame “climate change” for causing many different planetary phenomenon. Soon, these same clowns shall use “climate change” to justify their own exploitative actions. We must oppose the clowns!

    This is the first time I have visited your blog. I especially like your header of the elephant pirate with an American flag. It’s great. I also like your name, William Teach, it reminds me of one my favorite pirates, Edward Teach.

  2. Silke says:

    Teach said: On one had, the article author, Bill McGuire (who is neither a climatologist, and just happens to have a gloom and doom climate change book coming out next January)…

    No, but he does specialize in volcanology, global geophysical events and geological consequences of climate change.

    http://www.benfieldhrc.org/people/cvs/cv_bm.htm

    I don’t know if he’s right or not. I think I’ll just stick with the IPCC.

  3. Thanks, ortho, preciate you stopping by. William Teach is play on Edward Teach, since I live in NC and my real middle name is William.

    Silke, funny how you focus on that one little bit, rather then what the post is actually about. Care to comment on it?

  4. Silke says:

    I thought I did – please see my last sentence above. (i.e. I don’t know if he’s correct, though he does seem to have some credentials. I will stick with the IPCC’s report.)

  5. Scrapiron says:

    Do you think Algor-abge will go away now that NASA has corrected a mistake and 1998 was not the hottest year on record. It’s still 1934 as the hottest. What were our folks doing in 1934, having so much sex they warmed the world?

  6. Oh, Silke, Silke, Silke. Big time cop out.

    Scrapiron, let’s hope so. But, there is way too much money for the Goracle to make off this issue.

  7. Web Reconnaissance for 08/10/2007…

    A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often….

  8. beth says:

    Teach! The cave men used those turbocharged clubs to bang over the cave womens’ heads and drag them to caves. That caused a lot of friction which, of course, lead to an imbalance in the atmosphere …

    Well, what keeps sticking with me is how does anyone know what the weather was like in – say – Georgia USA – in 2000 BC? Were there tornadoes tearing across the plains? Was there flooding and droughts? There are theories and speculation and counting rings on trees, but no one really knows.

    Besides, if you really want to do something about carbon footprints – go over to China and tell them they have to put emission controls on their vehicles. Quit picking on Americans as though we are the only ones on earth that have anything to do with anything.

  9. Wear Red on Friday Round-up…

    Looking at what people on my blogroll are talking about.
    The Pirate’s Cove: Climate Now Causes Everything!
    7.62mm Justice has some bad news for Al Gore.
    Southern Sass on Crime has updates on Bugsy, the Chihuahua, that was “forgotten” while le…

  10. Well, Beth, in Global Warming Land (similar to Disney Land, just not as fun), any temp changes that occured in the past 4 billion years are natural, but cannot be natural today. Go figure 😉

  11. Silke says:

    On the contrary, Teach. Natural factors have been studied and measured extensively and are definitely part of the equation. If you look at the latest IPCC report they have actually assigned values to all the components of climate change. Radiative forcing is a measure of the influence that a factor has in altering the balance of incoming and outgoing energy in the Earth-atmosphere system. It is expressed in watts per square meter. You can see those numbers on Figure TS.5. on page 32 of the Technical Summary (Working Group I of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report).

    http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_TS.pdf

    Do you know of a different report that shows different numbers indicating the temp changes are natural?

  12. jt says:

    SIlke – try these two websites, and educate yourself. http://www.surfacestations.org and http://www.climateaudit.org

    http://www.climateaudit.org is currently down and has been for a few days via a DNS attack – as soon as this researcher released his data on NASA temperature re-configurations (oops NASA had a Y2K bug and didn’t (wink) know it) his site went down. This same researcher, Steve McIntyre, debunked Mann’s “hockey stick” graph.

    AGW climate change is a HOAX! The biggest FRAUD ever perpetrated. As for AGW having anything to do with “Plate Tectonics”, that statement is pure, unadulterated bull! I am a professional Geologist with 30 years experience – that premise is completely un-scientific, don’t even go there, because you do not know what you are talking about.

  13. Silke says:

    jt, I looked at the websites you provided (the first one anyway). Regarding the NASA temperature issue this is an excellent site and gives a good explanation: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934-and-all-that/
    From my understanding Steve McIntyre discovered a slight error in NASA’s surface temperature records for the United States. He sent an email to NASA, and James Hansen fixed the problem, crediting McIntyre for the good catch. So how big an error was it? Well, 1998 went from being listed as 0.01 degrees warmer than 1934 to being listed as 0.02 degrees cooler. That means 1934 is back to being the “official” hottest U.S. year on record, although it’s still a statistical tie. Some of the other U.S. years in this decade were also downgraded slightly. This all had virtually no bearing on the global temperature record.

    I’m not a geologist so I can’t speak to what Bill McGuire is claiming about the effects of climate change on the Earth’s surface (see my statement above). But since you are a geologist can you tell me if there is any correlation at all between rising sea levels and volcanic activity?

    Also, regarding my last question in the statement above – since Teach doesn’t seem interested in providing different numbers to back up his claim, do you know of a different report (as extensive as the IPCC’s) that would indicate the temp changes are primarily natural?

  14. jt says:

    Silke – I am no expert on climate dynamics, but global warmists have projected “catastrophic” temperature rises, based on a 0.6 degree rise per the last 100 years. An error of 0.1 degree in the temperature data set to project “catastrophic” temperture rise in the future is in itself a ” catastrophic” blunder in credibility, wouldn’t you agree? That 0.1 degree difference that you slough off is an error of 16.666%. As for sea level changes due to volcanism etc, locally maybe, but on a global scale it’s not even measurable. For you Americans on this thread, go to Plymouth Rock. How much has the Atlantic Ocean risen since 1620? Go measure it.

  15. jt says:

    try this link as well: http://climatesci.colorado.edu/2007/08/08/giss-has-reranked-us-temperature-anomalies/

    The discussion is very informative and there is a paucity of ad-hominem attacks, for once. it’s a healthy debate. Besides, I live in the Great White North – the western part of it. Our temperature for August 14 was 6 C this morning, or 42.8 F. We have already had frost up north this week, summer is over. Frankly, I would welcome a warmer climate up here for a longer period of time, so why fight it?

  16. Silke says:

    global warmists have projected “catastrophic” temperature rises, based on a 0.6 degree rise per the last 100 years.

    Actually I think that number is a little higher. The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report states 0.74 degree Celsius per the last 100 years. I believe your figure comes from the Third Assessment Report.

    jt said: That 0.1 degree difference that you slough off is an error of 16.666%.

    Actually the error for the hottest year on record was 0.03, not 0.1 and the error you site is comparing two different numbers. The error with NASA’s numbers has to do with temperatures in the United States only. The second number you were comparing it to has to do with global temperature averages.

    As stated at the site I recommended it said…

    The net effect of the change was to reduce mean US anomalies by about 0.15 ºC for the years 2000-2006. There were some very minor knock on effects in earlier years due to the GISTEMP adjustments for rural vs. urban trends. In the global or hemispheric mean, the differences were imperceptible (since the US is only a small fraction of the global area).

    jt said: As for sea level changes due to volcanism etc,…

    I thought it was the other way around – i.e. McGuire is saying that the added pressure from sea level changes may cause an increase in volcanic activity. Is this possible?

    Sorry for the long response. I’m still interested in seeing any reports you might have that would indicate the temp changes are primarily natural.

  17. jt says:

    Why would increased pressure from sea level changes cause increased volcanic activity? Any ideas? You tell me.

  18. Silke says:

    Well I’m no professional Geologist, but this sounds plausible to me…

    But how can rising sea levels cause volcanoes to erupt? The answer lies in the enormous mass of the water pouring into the ocean basins from the retreating ice sheets. The addition of over a hundred metres depth of water to the continental margins and marine island chains, where over 60% of the world’s active volcanoes reside, seems to be sufficient to load and bend the underlying crust.
    This in turn squeezes out any magma that happens to be hanging around waiting for an excuse to erupt. It may well be that a much smaller rise can trigger an eruption if a volcano is critically poised and ready to blow.
    Eruptions of Pavlof volcano in Alaska, for example, tend to occur during the winter months when, for meteorological reasons, the regional sea level is barely 30cm (12in) higher than during the summer. If other volcanic systems are similarly sensitive then we could be faced with an escalating burst of volcanic activity as anthropogenic climate change drives sea levels ever upwards. (from the article Teach cites above)

    Is this wrong? Please explain.

  19. No, you are not wrong, that is one of the explanations.

    The other is that higher water levels may push more water into the magma chambers, creating more gasses, which can cause volcano’s to become more active. This can also effect fault zones which are not under water.

    As far as your disbelief in the majority of temp increase being natural, other then a silly non scientific report from the UN, what proof do you have that it is other then mostly natural? Why did we have so many really hot years back in the late 20’s through late 30’s? We did not have huge amounts of cars and air travel back then, did we? Why have we had warm periods in the past with no cars?

  20. Silke says:

    Teach said: Why did we have so many really hot years back in the late 20’s through late 30’s?

    What do you men by “we”? The United States or the world? Please cite your source.

    Teach said: Why have we had warm periods in the past with no cars?

    There have been many reasons we have had warm periods in the past…changes in the Earth’s orbit around the Sun, major tectonic activity, etc., but the fact that natural factors caused climate changes in the past does not mean that the current climate change is primarily natural. Just because forest fires have long been caused naturally by lightning strikes does not mean that fires cannot also be caused by a careless camper.

    The difference between your argument and mine is that I actually have some numbers to back it up. Please look at Figure TS.5 (Global Mean Radiative Forcings) on page 32 of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report:

    http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_TS.pdf

    Do you have something similar to support your claim?

  21. Dave says:

    The man-caused climate change debate divides two camps. The first camp could be called the freedom freaks. These people see the issue as an orchestrated campaign, designed by all oppressive organizations, starting with the United Nations, to remove their liberties, and thus destroy most chances of real progress. Progress has always come from responsible freedom of action.
    The second camp could be called the control freaks.To them, liberty and freedom are dangerous. They see the contrived hypothesis of man-caused climate change as the ultimate means to remove forever any real freedom, except, of course, their long desired freedom to Bolshevise the world totally and forever through the power of stick weilding repressive government action.
    The largest group, the sheep people, believe whoever yells the longest and loudest, and this is certainly the control freaks, through the conspiracies of the controlled media/press.
    For anyone with a wish to read a detailed, scientific report covering this issue, here is a site from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. It pretty well debunks the man caused climate change argument, and the desperate control freaks’ hysterias.
    http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

Bad Behavior has blocked 7124 access attempts in the last 7 days.