Global warming is just a liberal plot, just like the Muppets are.
Season’s Greetings from Fox…an annual tradition of using snowstorms and cold temperatures to mock global warming:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201112210005
And the Muppets do Marx:
Bolling Doubles Down On Attack On The Muppets: “How Much More Demonizing Can You Be To Capitalism? It’s Terrible”
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201112050025
Fox Business’ Follow The Money Unmasks The Muppets’ Liberal Agenda: “Brainwashing” Your Kids!
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201112020036
Looking forward to hearing how your experiment goes, POA. Reminds me of past experimentations (smoke through a bottle), different variation and not as elaborate as yours, yet with pleasing results.
And thanks to juannie for your work as an atmospheric scientist’s associate, and the post and links, although it will not reach those “astute Fox News fans.”

Posted by: DakotabornKansan | Dec 23 2011 15:31 utc | 3

Very worrying concerning the Methane release. Methane is 30 times more potent than Carbon Dioxide in trapping heat and have read before that a big concern is the huge Siberian territory melting. The chances of it causing amplifying feedback or “runaway Climate Change” seems to be both huge and disasterous.
A Journalist I read fairly regularly, Gwynne Dyer, had a good article on Durban and the effects of a 2 degree rise.

“Three years ago, while I was interviewing the director of a think tank in New Delhi, she suddenly dropped a bomb into the conversation. Her institute had been asked by the World Bank to figure out how much food production India would lose when the average global temperature was two degrees Celsius higher, she said—and the answer was 25 percent.
This study, like similar ones that the bank commissioned in other major countries, has never been published, presumably because the governments of those countries put huge pressure on the bank to keep the numbers secret. But the Indian government undoubtedly knows the truth.
A 25 percent loss of food production would be an almost measureless calamity for India. It now produces just enough food to feed its 1.1 billion people. If the population rises by the forecast quarter-billion in the next 20 years, and meanwhile its food production falls by 25 percent due to global warming, half a billion Indians will starve.”

Source: http://www.straight.com/article-562791/vancouver/gwynne-dyer-durban-climatechange-conference-was-almost-total-failure

Posted by: Colm O’ Toole | Dec 23 2011 17:22 utc | 5

Looks like the profit motive has finally got around to strangling the world. If there was money to be made in cleaning up the mess it would surely proceed more quickly.

Posted by: ruralito | Dec 23 2011 17:34 utc | 7

juannie, excellent link. One quick note: the left side menu is scroll bar, and you have to scroll down to the methane links. I like the NASA one, especially the pic of the methane hydrate burning while somebody is holding it.

Posted by: no6ody | Dec 23 2011 18:53 utc | 9

@b, A housekeeping request and suggestion… full RSS feeds. Getting back into following MoA after the break, but often from low bandwidtth connection, and so via RSS… Could we have a full feed option? This would also greatly unload your server. PD

Posted by: PeeDee | Dec 23 2011 19:47 utc | 11

b
just to say that before i or the year should fall, i want to thank you for being here
it has both a special & profound signification, for me
i know i am not alone

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 23 2011 20:07 utc | 13

I second your sentiment re b r’giap, and no, you are not alone…
and I know I am not alone.
And a warm Season’s greetings to all you who make this watering hole so refreshing!!!

Posted by: juannie | Dec 23 2011 22:31 utc | 15

Merry Christmas, everyone @ MOA! ..Because it IS Christmas,isn’t it?

Posted by: arthurdecco | Dec 24 2011 4:03 utc | 17

Yes, everyone have a wonderful and safe holiday.
With regards to the climate change, no matter where your opinions fall on the issue, to assume 7 billion humans, and their activities, have no impact on the planet, is the height of naivete. If I were a wealthy man with a vested interest in the status quo, I could hire a number of folks to convince some of the people, that water, is in fact, not wet.

Posted by: ben | Dec 24 2011 5:40 utc | 19

Dakota, you can dismiss my sensitivity to the climate issue, but I am an organic gardener by trade. I am a natural skeptic and I certainly do understand science. Climate science, like medicine and social sciences, isn’t science. There is great doubt about the principle drivers of climate change, those who don’t doubt it, are nothing but the Amen corner. Again, I have chosen, by trade to improve the environment, and not for cynical reasons.
You are mistaken about Greenland. For 300 of the last 2000 years, Greenland shows fossil evidence of lush growth and cover. The hottest/driest days of record for TX precede our being here. The hottest days in your part of the Great Plains and Northwards dates back to the 30’s. There is much we don’t know. There is much you evidently don’t know about science. We wont be able to “see” climate change in the evidence. Likely, it will be something that builds inertia before the evidence is shown, or, put another way, once we can measure the effects, it will be far too late. But, you ignore the outlying evidence I’ve indicated. You ignore that we don’t really know much about the Solar Cycle, the Earth’s own releases, how much heat is lost to the atmosphere. Hell, we don’t know what cloud cover means–it can indicate cooling or the greenhouse effect. There is so much we don’t understand, so much that we cant quantify, so much that we understand so poorly. You say we’ve been studying this for 50 years, but we haven’t had the same conclusions since then. How do you explain the Earth’s failure to warm over the last 5 years? Science is slow to suggest they know, your impetuous judgment is not grounded in science.

Posted by: scottindallas | Dec 24 2011 17:21 utc | 21

ALL RIGHT!!!! At last, we have someone thats gotta know WTF he’s talkin’ about!
To set us all on the path to enlightenment, an “organic gardener” has weighed in, and given us the unvarnished facts about the unknown unknowns surrounding global warming. Just imagine the hefty scientific background that must be amassed to finally be able to declare yourself an “organic gardener by trade”!!!
Well, we’re lucky to have ‘im, thats for damned sure!
As for me, I have completed my latest experiment, and have had my theory proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. The Coke bottle, did, in fact, fill up with shit when I filled it up with shit, exactly as I expected it would. And the thermometer indicated a rise of twenty degrees. And that was while I could still read it! No telling how high it went after it disappeared from sight. I also added a component unmentioned in the scientific essay that I offered in comment #2. Prior to filling the bottle with shit, I deposited a live Blue-Bellied Lizard within. Upon careful observation, I noted that filling the bottle with shit did in fact kill the lizard.
I think the conclusions that can be reached by my careful and scientific experimentation are clearly evident, even though I lack a degree in the esteemed field of Proffessional Organic Gardening.

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Dec 24 2011 23:11 utc | 23

once we can measure the effects, it will be far too late.
i agree scott

Posted by: annie | Dec 25 2011 5:02 utc | 25

so the chinese are calling amerikkan ambassador gary locke *wolf in sheep’s skin*
[having lots of problem posting in wapo these days]
but locke is just a hapless patsy
the anglos/gringos use lots of patsies to take the rap these days., while they chortle in the shadow siping champagn, so we’ve faces like obama, rice, yoo, locke etc ,
who’s the real wolf in sheep’s skin
forchrissake, do gringos really believe in their own shit ?

Posted by: denk | Dec 25 2011 6:19 utc | 27

me too

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 25 2011 21:01 utc | 29

Another step towards a multi-polar currency world: China and Japan plan direct currency exchange agreement.

Posted by: Philippe | Dec 26 2011 9:18 utc | 31

How about Rolling Stone requiring you to log in with Facebook to comment to that article linked at in @32. Screw you, Rolling Stone. You need to be thrown out with the rest of the trash if and when the time comes, you CIA scum.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | Dec 26 2011 20:07 utc | 33

Glad to see you’re still here scott, especially after all the flack you received although some of it well deserved in my mind.
I happen to be an organic farmer/gardener myself (in my retirement) and share your desire to see our planet treated in a responsible manner to leave something better for our progeny.
To start off, I agree with you on several points. Examples, “We cannot establish much in the way of controls”. “Ethanol is more polluting.” “We should push to be more efficient [with energy]” and in my interpretation of your comments, there is too much bullshit green-washing by wanna’ feel good liberals. However as a twenty year veteran of being on the front line of climate research and “science” I have a lot to disagree with you on.
I am not going to offer you a plethora of links and graphs to make my points but am only going to state them and leave it up to you to be an honest and open explorer of my claims.
First, I find it very sophomoric for you to state that “climate science… isn’t science” and that “we don’t know squat”. There are many (globally thousands) highly trained and highly intelligent individuals participating in the field of climate and weather research. I personally have met and got to know a few and I was employed by one of them for over twenty-one years. (Incidentally one of the very few active scientists that did not work for any government agency, educational establishment or private corporate entity. In essence, a totally independent research scientist who’s contributions were always significant enough to receive funding from agencies exploring the field.) I would ask you to be more prudent and judicious in making such claims especially on this blog. They are really uninformed opinions.
That Greenland was green, actually during what is known as the Medieval Warm Period or Medieval Climate Optimum (approx. 950 to 1100 ce. followed by the Little Ice Age approx. 1550 to 1850 ce.) is not in any way an argument to dispute the claim that the planet is in a warming trend that exceeds anything for the past several million years. Costal Greenland is green today as it was when the Scandinavians first settled there and attempted to practice an agricultural existence for a short while before the warming period ended. Anything beyond the costal areas is and has been for the last several million years under up to over two miles of solid ice. Today, if you look into it you will discover that the ice is melting at an unprecedented rate. And incidentally some of the “non-scientific” knowledge of past climates comes from ice cores recovered from deep in the Greenland ice.
That we “don’t know squat” is belied by the fact that we know enough about the underlying physics of and behavior of the global climate and weather systems that large and complex computer simulations are grinding out our global weather forecasts on a daily basis with a high degree of and constantly improving accuracy. The accuracy is measured on a quantitative basis and available is you choose to look for it.
We don’t know everything about weather and climate. They are highly nonlinear and complex dynamical systems and as such defy extreme accuracy in prediction or understanding. But enough is known about their general behavior and underlying physical properties that we can get pretty damn close, especially on a short term (hours/days) basis. Right now 24 to 48 hour forecasts are for all intents and purposes right on most of the time. They are accurate enough that potential recipients of hurricane devastation can be forewarned up to a week in advance with remarkable confidence. Not always. We don’t understand quite enough to have predicted the local catastrophic flooding that Vermont was subjected to by Irene even though we knew she would hit us hard. We’re still in the process of recovery. But we are getting better and improvements are happening yearly.
The most difficult problem that the layman has in understanding anthropogenic climate effects is the disinformation that is being constantly churned out by “experts” that almost with our exception have no or very little actual climatic research backgrounds and are funded by corporate sponsored “think tanks” that are the handmaidens of vested interests in the status quo, most especially the fossil energy industries. The tobacco lobby that so successfully thwarted a plethora of evidence condemning tobacco as a health hazzard for so many years developed the “scientific” PR practices that have so successfully been used again to deny the consensus of literally thousands of climate researchers from all over the globe, of all persuasions of race, nationality and ideologies. The few so called experts who deny the evidence accumulated by up to 99 % of the working and respected and peer reviewed researchers are and have been exposed as complete shams. My one link in this screed links to a book that was written by a skeptical but honest PR executive who set out to discover the truth and was proven wrong in his skepticism, and then wrote a book about his findings. The link is to his blog and you will find his book “Climate Cover-Up” (by James Hansen).
Scott, if you get your information or form your opinions from the mainstream media, you are getting lied to and scammed. Look beyond any of these sources and delve into the works of integrity of the true working “scientists” in the field. I’ll leave it up to you to do the research to find them if indeed you are truly an “honest observer”.
And above all, keep up the good work in the organic fields. Diversity and real food are becoming more and more important to our survival especially after the methane feedbacks kick in and exacerbate an already untenable climate situation.

Posted by: juannie | Dec 27 2011 2:34 utc | 35

Newt Gringich, was a load of shit!

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Dec 27 2011 14:45 utc | 37

Global warming (I don’t like ‘climate change’) and many of its effects are factual. One can argue about the causes, feedback loops, interactions, etc.
All that set aside, it is a good example of lobbying, meddling, accusations, counter-claims, disparagement, etc. affecting public opinion strongly. Polls show that in the past few years, belief in and concern about global warming have waned. (Perhaps in part be because concern about other rubrics, like the economy, have amplified.)
The whole story represents a slipping away from Science, and tossing ‘facts’ in to the ‘opinion’ bin, and thus the ‘fashionable meme’ category. One year, it leads to alarm and subsidies for wind farms and ethanol, another year it is a negligible blip, past its sell date, not relevant or ‘real’ and fracking is essential for economic growth.
Quite different, for ex., from refusing a new cosmology (a historical example that is often brought up), or denying the Theory of Evolution, because the Earth simply continues its now well known path, and antibiotics continue to be produced, mutations go on occurring (etc.), in short, the denial does not much affect what really goes on in the world, except for the fact that nay-sayers may keep or acquire adherents who contribute allegiance, adulation, cash…
Global warming is directly linked to Earth-human interaction, it is a different kettle of fish. No doubt that explains the vicious, and effective, back-lash against the Science.

Posted by: Noirette | Dec 27 2011 16:24 utc | 39

Juannie, you stated that we can’t predict with our models the future of the climate. In fact, you overstate the accuracy of the modelling. That alone is proof that we don’t have the “science” behind us yet. I’m not dismissive of the inquiry, but we still can’t predict the changes–namely, nothing explains the fact that the Earth has cooled over the last 5 years. There are many variables that we don’t understand. I’m not saying it’s fruitless, I’m saying we all need to cool our jets. I’d make the same argument to a denier and an activist.
I do have a good understanding of the philosophy of science–a discipline I studied in school. History shows that few sciences have much real evidence till 150 years of inquiry have passed. We’ve been at this for maybe 50. Many of our assumptions are turned on their heads, mitigating factors dismissed for the agenda of whomever reports. In such complex and vast systems, the scientific challenges multiply.
Finally, I don’t get much of my news from the main stream media. I get it from fact-based reporters and others who are at least earnest (this site and others that I think many of us visit qualify on that) On energy, I’d commend Rob’t Bryce to everyone. He’s as good as Glenn Greenwald, Justin Raimondo, and the Cockburns.

Posted by: scottindallas | Dec 28 2011 16:00 utc | 41

nothing explains the fact that the Earth has cooled over the last 5 years.

To set the record straight the last 6 years fell into the category of the warmest ten years on record. The table that follows shows the temperature anomalies for the years 2005 through 2010 (as reported by NOAA):
(I don’t know how the formatting will show up for the chart at the end but it should be readable anyway.)

The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for November 2011 was the 12th warmest on record at 13.35°C (55.81°F), which is 0.45°C (0.81°F) above the 20th century average of 12.9°C (55.0°F). The margin of error associated with this temperature is +/- 0.07°C (0.13°F).
For 2010, the combined global land and ocean surface temperature tied with 2005 as the warmest such period on record, at 0.62°C (1.12°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F). 1998 is the third warmest year-to-date on record, at 0.60°C (1.08°F) above the 20th century average.
Anomaly
Year °C °F – Ranking as warmest on record
2005 0.62 1.11 — 1
2006 0.56 1.01 — 6
2007 0.55 0.99 — 7
2008 0.48 0.86 — 10
2009 0.56 1.01 — 5
2010 0.62 1.12 — 1 (tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record.)

If you choose to respond I would like to know the source of your information on this. It doesn’t correspond at all with the above report or anything else I have seen. For the past twenty some years the global temperature has been undergoing an upswing in the face of naturally occurring factors that sould be cooling the global temperatures if it weren’t for yearly increasing concentration of the greenhouse gasses.
When in doubt about the climate debate be sure to check out what Exxon Mobil and the Koch Industries have to offer. How? Check into what the writers for their funded think tanks, like Robert Bryce of the Manhattan Institute and the Institute for Energy Research are saying.
It turns out that almost without exception the climate deniers can be shown to be funded by the energy industries that have the most at stake in keeping the public in the dark about the realities of a warming global climate. A hand full of climate “experts” who have no real credentials in climate science have been overwhelming the message of literally thousands of climate scientists worldwide who do the difficult and complex work of honest day to day climate research. That’s because they have the funding of the vested interests and the “Amen corner” of the corporately owned and controlled MSM.
Alarmism is warranted when it is imperative to sound the alarm. I have that ethical responsibility to my and your progeny.
This blog is mainly focused on international affairs but international tensions are only going to be exacerbated by the pressure of changing global climate with the dislocation of millions of people and the strains of failing infrastructure on all nations.

Posted by: juannie | Dec 29 2011 17:00 utc | 43

Excellent rebuttals, Juannie.

Posted by: PissedOffAmerican | Dec 30 2011 2:04 utc | 45

juannie,
As an animal lover and raising many animals, your story saddens me also.
I detest the ways animals are raised/confined in factory farms and it is not even healthy for humans. At least your animals had a good life, if short.
Is it too expensive now to keep them? Is it a problem of needing more room? Are they now too dangerous as they are getting so large? I have never raised pigs so excuse these questions if they seem naive. Not to sound like detective Columbo, but just one more question. Why do you object to using machinery to till the soil?

Posted by: Rick Happ | Jan 8 2012 1:51 utc | 47

To the initiated, John Robb, publishes a website called “Global Guerrillas”.
In a not totally dissimilar manner that b has pointed to Leverett’s site “Race to Iran”, I present for your late night intellectual pleasure a Global Guerillas trilogy of posts. However, with this referral, I offer no platitudes for this man nor any pleas to donate to his website. I make no final judgment here on his soul, but at first glance, the words of r’giap describing Slothrop’s posts comes to mind “the people are always missing”. My plea is simply for Whiskey Bar readers to delve into at least these three of his posts which, when considered together, opens a window to observe a possible future nightmare.
Modern Darknets
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2011/12/the-proliferation-of-darknets.html
The Future of Drone Warfare
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2011/12/drone-bonjwas.html
The Digital Roll-Out of Resilient Communities
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2011/12/why-a-focus-on-digital-change.html
As I cautioned that Leverett was plugged, Robb appears to be plugged directly into multiple 14.4KV high power circuits. While Robb may not appear to be working as hard to prevent any U.S. conflict with Iran or any other foreign or domestic entity, he definitely has ideas on what future conflicts (and peace) will look like.
Please don’t assume I’ve been drinking Kool-aid from the Darkside. It’s only imported Whiskey that I drink.

Posted by: Rick Happ | Jan 8 2012 6:10 utc | 49

It’s done. Squeeky, Gruntly and Hogwood now only coexist as souls departed from earthly existence and as edible flesh for human consumption. Separated but not; or so all the sages and perennial philosophies say.
Me? I don’t feel good but what is that in comparison to what these three magnificent beings experienced as their lives were so violently torn from them. Of course we were reassured that they didn’t suffer and experienced nothing as they squealed and thrashed after the first bullet didn’t just “drop” them as we were told would happen. I don’t feel good but I am trying to just experience what I am feeling and not be attached. Always wonderful advice from the masters of spiritual teachings. Arragh! Arragh! Arragh! It doesn’t help. All these gentle and so enlightened soundings words. Arragh! Arragh!
I hung around. So did my wife until after the last, Gruntly, thrashed and retreated into her hut to finally rest silently and motionless. I stayed on to “help” where needed. My good friend Alden came over with his tractor to be able to lift them as they bled out and were gutted and skinned; a life time Vermont farmer who has experienced such since he can remember but with a gruff outward demeanor and a sensitive heart that bleeds silently as he participates in the necessary process. I followed him home in his tractor with my flashers going to warn others on the short highway trip and then we drank a couple beers and talked about the weather as it used to be when we were both young and winters were for real for the whole winter. Plus 31 degrees today which made the cleaning process quite comfortable for the “harvesters”. They did their job, quickly, efficiently and well. I am appreciative. One is an old time friend. I am grateful and appreciative.
Life goes on. I hope my night tonight is less stressful than last night. But then again maybe not. Maybe I just need to wallow in a little more of my karmic consciousness. I’m a little inebriated. I’ll feel better tomorrow. Time heals. At least for we still here in this plane of existence.
Rick, I appreciate your sensitive response and will try to answer your questions maybe later tonight or tomorrow. Your third link in #49 seemed to be pertinent to the positive aspect of this process.

Posted by: juannie | Jan 8 2012 19:11 utc | 51

I suspect a lot more people would find meat less tasty if they were to participate in the “harvesting” of it. the vast majority of us know that meat comes in little Styrofoam packages.
as a youngster I chopped the heads off chickens, plucked their feathers, killed hogs and scraped their hair off with a big knife after they were dipped in a big barrel of hot water, and gutted and skinned cattle. the worst part for me is the smell of the guts and seeing the lifeless eyes in the severed heads.
I eat meat because my wife likes it a lot but could probably do without it. I find that I can’t think about it too much. seeing a truckload of lambs going to slaughter makes me kinda sad when I hear their soft bleating.
dunno what you can do about it. I left the farm. it is hard to eat something that you have grown fond of.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jan 8 2012 20:55 utc | 53