Global Warming To Close Florida Schools

Won’t somebody please think of the children?

(Click Orlando) Schools, courts and government offices throughout the western Florida Panhandle plan to close because of anticipated snow and ice as a polar vortex grips much of the country.

The National Weather Service has issued a winter storm watch for the region. Forecasters say a mix of freezing rain and snow is expected Tuesday through Wednesday.

Schools in Santa Rosa and Escambia counties will be closed those days. Courts and many government offices also announced closures in advances of the wintry weather.

Those are the two western-most counties in Florida, up in the Panhandle. There are also closings in New Orleans and Mississippi from global warming created snow, ice, and cold. When Warmists told us that snow would be a thing of the past, I didn’t realize they were referring to the time when the Earth was in a cold age.

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

9 Responses to “Global Warming To Close Florida Schools”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Hey Pirate,

    You should read Gene Robinson’s essay that you linked earlier to find out how dumb you sound.

    This post is just more evidence that most deniers aren’t interested in science, but only politics.

  2. gitarcarver says:

    Well Jeffery, I did read Robinson’s essay and it sounds like it was written by you. No wonder you are with it.

    But let’s look at what was said by him:

    They forget that it’s winter, and apparently they don’t quite grasp that even when it’s cold in one part of the world, it can be hot in another.

    No one is forgetting anything other that Robinson. His childish rant doesn’t address the key issue that it is colder now than it has been. He simply tries to rebut that fact by saying “it is hot somewhere else.” Whether that heat is offset by the cold to raise or lower temperatures is not even broached by him. Like you, he just calls people names and moves on.

    On the global scale, 2013 was “merely” the fourth-warmest or seventh-warmest on record, depending on whether you believe the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or NASA.

    Robinson fails to say when that “record” starts and yet later accuses realists of “cherry picking” a year to show there has been no warming.

    Robinson cannot apply the same criteria to his beliefs as he wants of others.

    The agencies take slightly different approaches in analyzing and extrapolating the available data, which accounts for the discrepancy,…

    So Robinson (and you) want people to believe in something based on data that is 1) not settled and b) extrapolated?

    That is not science at all and any attempt to define it as such is ridiculous.

    Why is it getting warmer? There’s still just one explanation that fits the available facts: …

    Ah yes. The ol’ “earth rests on the shoulders of Atlas because there is no other alternative.”

    You have used that same position before and it presupposes a hubris that just because something may not be known, it has to fit another set of hypothesis.

    Once again, that is ridiculous and not science.

    President Obama, who understands the science, should use his executive powers as best he can, not just to reduce carbon emissions but also to prepare the country for confronting the environmental, political and military hazards of a warmer world.

    Always leave people laughing. Obama understands the science. Heh heh heh. That’s rich.

  3. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    What is the concentration (measured) of carbonic acid in any ocean or sea? What is the predominat measured acid in any ocean or sea? Where is all the CO2?

  4. Gail Combs says:

    You might want to look at the Wisconsin Glaciation and compare it to the ‘Polar Vortex’

    Steve Goddard did and it is… illuminating. link Especially since a fall 2012 paper Can we predict the duration of an interglacial? says…

    …Comparison with MIS 19c, a close astronomical analogue characterized by an equally weak summer insolation minimum (474 W m−2 ) and a smaller overall decrease from maximum summer solstice insolation values, suggests that glacial inception is possible despite the subdued insolation forcing…

    The paper goes on to say

    … thus, the first major reactivation of the bipolar seesaw would probably constitute an indication that the transition to a glacial state had already taken place. …

    The bipolar seesaw is the melting of the arctic and the ice building in the Antarctica that we have been seeing for the last couple of decades just in case you did not know.

    http://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/msn_laugh.gif

  5. Jeffery says:

    gitar,

    “His childish rant doesn’t address the key issue that it is colder now than it has been.”

    No, it is not colder now. It IS cold in parts of the US right now, and snow trolls use that to press their political point, but it is just one piece of data in the global mean surface temperature. Today in Anchorage, Alaska it was 21 degrees warmer than normal. He DID address it, and you won’t. It’s cold in winter, colder some winters than others, part of that natural variability you talk about but don’t understand.

    “Robinson fails to say when that “record” starts and yet later accuses realists of “cherry picking” a year to show there has been no warming.”

    We have temperature records for 150 yrs or so. Almost all the warmest years have occurred recently. This record shows sustained warming. Temperature reconstructions (that deniers rely on to claim that is was much warmer than now earlier in the Holocene) actually show that it is most likely that the current warm period is the warmest in at least 50,000 years.

    Deniers reliably choose short enough time periods to show that warming is “not significant”, and choosing 1998 as your start date is disingenuous.

    “So Robinson (and you) want people to believe in something based on data that is 1) not settled and b) extrapolated?”

    Yes. That’s the way science works. You’re skilled at making mountains out of molehills. Minor variability exists in the databases. Why does that bother you? They all conclusively demonstrate that the Earth is warming; they all move in near lockstep. Different methods yielded nearly identical results. That is called scientific robustness.

    “You have used that same position before and it presupposes a hubris that just because something may not be known, it has to fit another set of hypothesis.

    Once again, that is ridiculous and not science.”

    Once again, you invoke magic to explain major climate changes. Science is EXACTLY proposing a hypothesis and determining if the data fit the hypothesis. The data overwhelmingly favored the hypothesis that fossil fuel-derived CO2 was causing the Earth to retain more of our Sun’s warmth. In fact, so much data have accumulated favoring the hypothesis that now it is considered a theory, similar to the theories of evolution, general relativity and the big bang.

    “Obama understands the science. Heh heh heh. That’s rich.”

    Since your President appears to understand the importance of global warming, I would suspect he understands the science better than you do. But why not take a cheap shot for no real reason.

  6. Missing_Springy_Gumballs says:

    Nice Gail. Way to scare the children, which I mean to say J. (I still find it oddly eery how J sounds like Johnny Boy and the other whathisface.)

    So, first it was 7 year span before the scientists could believe that their beliefs and models could be wrong. Then they said 12-13 years. Then it was 15 years. Now, what? 20 years before they admit that they have backed a falsifiable cult that had no basis in reality except for the falsified data that they created?

  7. gitarcarver says:

    It’s cold in winter, colder some winters than others, part of that natural variability you talk about but don’t understand.

    Sorry Jeffery, Robinson fails to address the natural variability at all. That’s the point.

    We have temperature records for 150 yrs or so.

    There are so many things wrong with this. First, 150 years is less than a blink of an eye when it comes to the age of the earth. So when people like you and Robinson say “it is the hottest evah!” you aren’t dealing with scientific fact. You are dealing with a hysterical hypothesis that doesn’t have the data to support it. Secondly, the data does matter. The accuracy of the data matters. It is absolutely ridiculous to base a theory on data that covers roughly 7% of the time of the CE and was gathered using less than accurate instruments and then say “the temps rose .1 C over a decade.” You aren’t dealing in science at all. You are taking a conclusion and trying to fit the data to that conclusion rather than letting the data drive the conclusion.

    Once again, you invoke magic to explain major climate changes.

    I went back and looked at my post and don’t see “magic” anywhere in it. That is a charge that you continually bring up that is unsupported. One wonders why if your beliefs are based on science and so solid why you keep having to lie about those who disagree with you? Why do you keep making unsubstantiated charges? Once again, you seem to believe that we know and understand everything but that is not the way science works.

    Since your President appears to understand the importance of global warming, I would suspect he understands the science better than you do.

    Yeah, after all he has been so dead on in understanding economics, government, foreign policy, the military, etc. Let’s just assume that he understands the false religion of AGW.

    But why not take a cheap shot for no real reason.

    No reason? I guess that you didn’t read Robinson’s screed after all. Robinson uses Obama to strengthen the case that we should all bow down to your beliefs. How dare anyone ever question the understanding of Obama on anything.

    Thanks again for the laugh.

  8. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    You could have all sorts of believers if you would just answer the question of where is all the CO2? You keep going on about science but don’t understand that you need to give a “quantitative” assessment of the concentration of carbonic acid in the ocean to justify any of your arguments. Without that number, you have nothing.

  9. Edward says:

    wow I can’t believe Florida closing school bcause snow

Bad Behavior has blocked 5675 access attempts in the last 7 days.