Conservative Bastion
The only blog that can factually claim to shift the Bell Curve, along with the hearts & minds of America, to the right.
Monday, November 27, 2006
Global Warming Flip Flops
Last year, global warming wanted to cause hurricanes. This year, global warming (GW) has had a change of heart. I’m not yet sure what GW’s future plans are, but one thing is apparent: his strategy has changed – at least temporarily. Scientists aren’t sure if GW is on vacation, tired, or just fickle, but the hurricane numbers in 2006 are decisively down.

It was not the hurricane season we expected, thank you.

With cataclysmic predictions that hurricanes would swarm from the tropics like termites, no one thought 2006 would be the most tranquil season in a decade.

Barring a last-second surprise from the tropics, the season will end Thursday with nine named storms, and only five of those hurricanes. This year is the first season since 1997 that only one storm nudged its way into the Gulf of Mexico.

Where do I start? Scientists can’t predict anywhere close to the number of hurricanes in one year, but we are supposed to believe that they can predict the climate trends for decades to come?

Here’s more from the article explaining why there was a drop in hurricane:

Storms were starved for fuel after ingesting masses of dry Saharan dust and air over the Atlantic Ocean. Scientists say the storm-snuffing dust was more abundant than usual this year.

In the season's peak, storms were curving right like errant field goals. High pressure that normally hunkers near Bermuda shifted far eastward, and five storms rode the clockwise winds away from Florida.

Finally, a rapidly growing El Nino, a warming of water over the tropical Pacific Ocean, shifted winds high in the atmosphere southward. The winds left developing storms disheveled and unable to become organized.

As they say about the stock market: Past results are no indication of future performance.

I apologize for my skepticism, but there are too many variables and unknowns to make predictions for the climate change for the 21st century. We can’t predict weather for the next month and we can’t predict the number of hurricanes for the next year. How could you trust the prediction for the next 50 years? I’m sorry, but if you believe in global warming…I laugh at you.

Here is a visual aid...

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!
9 Comments:
Blogger Democrat said...
Global Warming is as real as the sun. Your Right-Wing spew hasn't worked, nor will it. Most Americans believe Global Warming is very real. Right-Wads hate the idea of doing something about Global Warming because big factories, big business, would be regulated more, they'd be forced to cut green house gas emissions -- it all cost money. Which, in conservative thinking, is more important than human life.

Conservative: "You immoral liberal. Having an abortion. Take responsibility."

Liberal: "I lost my job and my 401k. I had to take a job at the local grocery store just to feed my family. I can't afford to have this child, and the government won't help me. Would you mind if your tax dollars go to help me take care of my baby?"

Conservative: "Yes, I do mind. You should have taken more responsibility."

Liberal: "I'm sorry. I didn't know a couple of pig Republicans like you were going to cook the books and cause us all to lose our jobs."


Democrat

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
A couple weeks ago you wouldnt shut up about how all the richest people in the world were Democrats...now they are all Republicans. Your satire is effective.

The difference between stealing (which is what someone is basically doing when they cook the books) and abortion is that one ends someone's life, and the other does not.

Furthermore, you only lose your 401k if you invested everything in the company you work for.

Blogger Democrat said...
A couple weeks ago you wouldnt shut up about how all the richest people in the world were Democrats...now they are all Republicans. Your satire is effective.

Wow. The typical Right-Wing slant; nice. Anyway, a couple of weeks ago I was responding to your asinine comment that Democrats are uneducated -- the point, in case you missed it, is that how could those people (Bill Gates, Stephen King, Warren Buffet) be the richest men in the world and be stupid, too? Bill Gates went to MIT; Stephen King is one of the best writers ever; and Warren Buffet is a fine investor.

The difference between stealing (which is what someone is basically doing when they cook the books) and abortion is that one ends someone's life, and the other does not.

Hence the reason you are a Republican. On to the next.

Furthermore, you only lose your 401k if you invested everything in the company you work for.

That's not a smart choice? To invest in a company such as Enron? Well, we know now it wasn't, but before the shit hit the fan, so to speak, one would have thought it to be a great investment.

Democrat

Blogger Democrat said...
Correction: Stephen King is not even among the richest in the world. He is worth only 200 million. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are worth upwards of 50 billion. My point, though, is still present.

Democrat

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
the democratic party, as a whole, is less educated than the Republican party. i stand by that statement 100%. are democrats stupider...don't know, and don't care.

as for the enron statement. No one with half a brain would ever tell you that investing everything in Enron was a good idea. investment 101 tells you to diversify. the little known story about ENRON is that the people who lost everything were greedy and careless. they were trying to make a quick buck. if you diversify, enron might still hurt you, but it wouldnt kill you.

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
btw...did i read that you do not believe in macro evolution? assuming i read what you wrote correctly...you, my friend, are the most off the wall person i know. i seriously mean that in the best way possible. i don't think anyone else like you exists anywhere.

Blogger Democrat said...
the democratic party, as a whole, is less educated than the Republican party. i stand by that statement 100%. are democrats stupider...don't know, and don't care.

LMAO. Right, dude, right. The Ivy League institutions have what kind of reputation and are located where and have been accused by the likes of Bill O and Rush of being what? Too liberal, you say? The U of M, my school, was accused of being too liberal you say? They have the seventh best law school in the world, you say? Their medical school used to be number one in the world and is around three now, you say?

I stand by those FACTS 100%.

Yes. I did say I do not believe in Macro-evolution. Why? because I believe in Jesus. I'm a religous person. Hence my being a Pro-Life, Anti-War, Anti-Death Penalty, Give To The Poor Liberal. ;)

Democrat

Blogger Media Tycoon said...
i was under the impression that you were agnostic. anyways. professors tend to be liberal, yes that is true, but the rich tend to be Republican, and the rich tend to be better educated. also, the poor tend to be less educated and tend to be more Democratic.

institutions can be liberal, but that doesnt mean that all or even a majority of the students are liberal.

Blogger Democrat said...
Your argument is still shot. The "rich" constitutes a very small percentage of people. Professors, on the other hand, are not RICH but not poor, either. The five poorest states in the union are all in the deep south. The states with the lowest test scores are in the deep south.

The insanely rich, are, of course, going to be Republican. Republicans are pro-buisness. But the insanely rich constitute, as I said, a small percentage of the people. You do have the few insanely rich folks who vote Democratic, but not many.

Democrat

Links to this post:
Create a Link