Back in 2008 NH Democrat Jeanne Shaheen scared people with promises that Global Warming was real and that it would put an end to New Hampshire Winters–and our touristy-like winter wonderland of commerce. It was settled science. I heard that, didn’t you hear that?
A few years later, after 15 years of flat or declining average global temperatures, the same people who advised Shaheen on that ‘fact’ are insisting that Global Warming now makes it cold, and predicts increased snowfall. That must be the new “settled science?”
I guess the settled science isn’t that settled yet. Can we call that a Global Warming Theory induced Gore-tex? It’s like a vortex but then it’s not, but if you close your eyes and wish real hard….
However unsettling the settled science may be none of this matters until you attack a sitting Democrat US Senator by comparing what she claimed with reality.
That’s the cue for the progressive flying monkeys to attack.
I was immediately told that I had issues with my perception and rhetoric. That this continues to prove that Tea Party people (myself included I presume) are anti-science.
I was also regaled with a science synopsis on polar vorticies…because I stated that Democrats had made it up as an excuse to explain the latest ozone sized “hole” in their theory.
To clarify, polar vorticies are real. The excuse that they are caused by global warming or are (dare I say) predicted by Global warming, is contrived. For proof of that I defer to the scientific experts at Time magazine, who, in 1974 explained that…
Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world.
More snow, less snow. Sign of global cooling, wait–Sign of global warming. Seriously? Does this show have an intermission, because I’m all out of popcorn.
Science should never be settled. It is always open to question, challenge, re-evaluation, and new theories. You global Warming ‘experts’ and water-carriers (rising, falling, hot, and or frozen water–there’s room in the theory for all of them) are just a bunch of confidence men, (women, bisexuals, whatever).
This is nothing more than a faith-based exercise with mandatory tithing in the form of taxes and fees redistributed into the pockets of the church leaders and followers at the Temple of the Non-Falsifiable Hypothesis. Atheists should be pissed, and not just because it is a religion; it’s because they are paying into the coffers under mandate of law and executive order. (Where is Barry Lynn when you need him most?)
And as to the matter of who is anti-science, I will again defer to the very liberal Yale researcher, professor Dan Kahan…
“I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension,” Kahan wrote.
What did he find?
…those who identified as part of the tea party movement were actually better versed in science than those who didn’t, Kahan found. The findings met the conventional threshold of statistical significance, the professor said.
“But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the tea party,” he continued. “All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the ‘paper’ (New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused Internet sites like Huffington Post and POLITICO). I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly, I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view.”
A Yale professor, reported by POLITCO, surprised at his test results…most likely because he never left the Big Blue Progressive bubble he had sequestered himself in. The same bubble which my commenters peered through to remark on my TEA Party Bumpkin climatological wives-tales.
Next up, I expect, will be tales of how it is warm other places while it is cold here, from people who ignored how frigid it was other places when it was warm here.
It’s faith based climatology. Global Warming just IS, a “fact” you can verify with a question suggested by Steven Hayward at Powerline.
“…what climate or weather phenomenon would not be consistent with the general theory of climate change. “
I can’t wait to hear the answer.
