...And I don't mean that sarcastically. Read the following article for some major laughs at the expense of the apparently weather-altering Al Gore.
The Gore Effect strikes as the UN climate summit begins
The United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP15) begins today in Copenhagen, Denmark and brings together politicians and scientists from across the globe to address manmade climate change. As if on cue, the Gore Effect has struck much of the United States with record setting cold and snow.
The Gore Effect was coined in recent years for the unseasonable weather that oftentimes accompanies appearances by former vice president and Nobel Laureate Al Gore or when a global warming event is held. Cold and snow have followed Al Gore and these events across the globe with amazing frequency since 2004.
See the list of events where the Gore Effect came into play below
In just the last week, the United States has been besieged by cold weather events from coast to coast with more on tap for this week. Is it the Gore Effect being felt as a result of the climate summit?
Last Friday, snow fell in Houston, the earliest it ever has and it marked the first time it has snowed in the Texas city in back to back years. Other cities across the Lone Star state and Louisiana reported similar records. Near the Great Lakes, Grand Rapids, Michigan had more snow on Friday than it had ever recorded on that date.
The weekend brought snow to Denver, Colorado and temperatures 30 degrees below normal. Baltimore, Maryland had snow on December 5th – the same date it has its first snowfall of the season for six out of the eight last years.
In all, over the three day span from Friday through Sunday, 370 new record low temperatures were set or tied across the United States according to the National Climatic Data Center. Similarly 333 new record low maximums were set or tied over the same period.
Plenty of folks also saw record rain and snow. Over 130 new snowfall records were reported during the period and more than 100 record rain reports were made.
Today, in Sacramento, the California city is expecting record cold temperatures and a chance at its first snow since 2002. In the Midwest, blizzard conditions are expected across Iowa, Minnesota, and Illinois tomorrow.
Certainly it is most likely just coincidence but these types of events do seem to occur with a startling frequency at the most inopportune time for advocates of the manmade climate change theory.
Below is a partial list of various events over the last five years in which the Gore Effect was in full force:
January 15, 2004 – A global warming rally held in New York is subdued by one of the coldest days in New York City history. Gore tells the audience it was caused by global warming.
November, 2006 – Al Gore visits Australia two weeks before the start of summer. Ski resort operators are caught off guard by the snowfall.
February, 2007 – A hearing in the House of Representatives on global warming is cancelled after a snow and ice storm strike DC.
April, 2007 – Two feet of snow arrive on Itaca, NY in time for an Earth Day rally.
April, 2007 – A rally in Reno, Nevada held by the Northern Nevada Coalition for Climate Change is cut short by heavy rain and sleet.
March, 2007 – A media briefing on the Senate’s climate bill is cancelled due to a snowstorm.
December 5, 2007 – Washington DC receives its first snow of the season as the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee debates global warming legislation.
January, 2008 – A global warming rally in Baltimore, Maryland is held amidst falling snow.
October 22, 2008 – Al Gore appears at Harvard amidst temperatures that approached 125 year old low temperature records.
October 28, 2008 – The House of Commons debates a climate change bill as London gets its first October snow since 1922.
October 28, 2008 – John McCain and Barack Obama campaign in Pennsylvania. A wet, wintry mix causes McCain to cancel a rally while Obama goes forward. He teases people holding ‘stop global warming’ signs saying, "This is probably not the weather to hold up those signs. I'm not into global warming either but it's a little chilly today."
November, 2008 – The “People’s Power for the Climate” protest in Newcastle, Australia is canceled after one day due to rain and cold. Participants had been told to bring sunscreen and hats.
December, 2008 – The former vice president speaks to an audience in Milan, Italy about global warming. Outside it is snowing, a rare event in the area. Snow and freezing rain also strike Rome, Naples, Palermo and Sicily.
January 17, 2009 – President-elect Obama on his train tour to the capital stops in Philadelphia. He tells those gathered, “A planet that is warming from our unsustainable dependence on oil." Temperatures were 18 degrees with a wind chill below 10 degrees.
January 28, 2009 – Al Gore is set to testify to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about global warming. A winter storm arrives at the nation’s capital.
February 5, 2009 – Temperatures down to -6 degrees freeze a major global warming conference in Buffalo.
March 2, 2009 – A major global warming rally billed as “the nation’s largest act of civil disobedience” sees low turnout after a blizzard blanketed the nation’s capital with snow. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi cancels an appearance at the event after her flight was delayed due to the storm.
July, 2009 – Leading up to a visit from Al Gore to launch Safe Climate Australia, Melbourne suffers through temperatures approaching zero degrees.
October 9, 2009 – Al Gore is in Madison, Wisconsin for a convention of the Society of Environmental Journalists. Record cold temperatures arrive with him.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Why I Like the Discovery Channel
Given the choice between my three favorite channels, History, National Geographic, and Discovery, I would pick Discovery hands-down. Why? For a lot of reasons.
Reason #1: Bigger variety.
The Discovery channel has a far larger variety of subjects than the other two, from Dirty Jobs to Survivor Man.
Reason #2: Reliably good programs.
With Discovery, you know what to expect. From Mythbusters and Timewarp, you know you'll get lots of explosions and more than likely laughs. From Man vs Wild and Survivor Man, you can expect good information and a lot of "Gross, did he actually eat that?!" It's very consistent.
Reason #3: You actually learn something.
I'm not kidding. You finish an episode of, say, Mythbusters, and you feel like you just watched a really good comedy. You then realize, "Hey, I didn't know that before!"
Reason #4: They're not shoving a freaking agenda down your throat every other show.
This is one of the biggest reasons. On NatGeo or History, nearly every show is throwing an agenda of some kind in your face. The agenda ranges from environmental fanaticism to big-government propoganda to Darwinist lies. With Discovery, of course there's a bias, but it's far harder to detect. They mention evolution a lot, but they don't shove it in your face like National Geographic. There's also pretty much no anti-human lean like on the others. Instead of promoting an agenda, it appears dedicated to proving what they state in one of their commercials: "The world is just awesome." No government propoganda here, folks!
Reason #1: Bigger variety.
The Discovery channel has a far larger variety of subjects than the other two, from Dirty Jobs to Survivor Man.
Reason #2: Reliably good programs.
With Discovery, you know what to expect. From Mythbusters and Timewarp, you know you'll get lots of explosions and more than likely laughs. From Man vs Wild and Survivor Man, you can expect good information and a lot of "Gross, did he actually eat that?!" It's very consistent.
Reason #3: You actually learn something.
I'm not kidding. You finish an episode of, say, Mythbusters, and you feel like you just watched a really good comedy. You then realize, "Hey, I didn't know that before!"
Reason #4: They're not shoving a freaking agenda down your throat every other show.
This is one of the biggest reasons. On NatGeo or History, nearly every show is throwing an agenda of some kind in your face. The agenda ranges from environmental fanaticism to big-government propoganda to Darwinist lies. With Discovery, of course there's a bias, but it's far harder to detect. They mention evolution a lot, but they don't shove it in your face like National Geographic. There's also pretty much no anti-human lean like on the others. Instead of promoting an agenda, it appears dedicated to proving what they state in one of their commercials: "The world is just awesome." No government propoganda here, folks!
This Man is INSANE.
Yes, National Geographic has inspired yet another post. I was reading an article on some hunter-gatherer tribe in Africa, and came across quite possibly the most idiotic, stupid, loony, and utterly insane idea ever to disgrace the pages of that magazine. The idea was taken from the INSANE man mentioned earlier, Jared Diamond. He is the producer of the poorly-researched Guns, Germs, and Steel, which attributes medieval to Victorian Europe's success solely to those three things. His INSANE idea, however, is far crazier than his claims about Europe. He says-prepare yourself-that agriculture is the worst mistake mankind has ever made. Yes, you read that right. Apparently, Mr. Diamond would not mind not having a sure food supply, effective medicine, modern technology, and an insanely high standard of living, none of which are possible without agriculture. He blames agriculture for warfare, class stratification, disease epidemics, and major famines. Okaaayyy... You gotta wonder about the mental health of goons who claim things like that, but I'll address his claims one by one.
Class stratification: The problem with this claim is that it's so stinking vague. If he means loosely defined "classes" as in, upper, middle, and lower class in terms of income, too bad. It's a fact of life. Some people are rich, others are poor. I believe several countries tried to eliminate classes. What were they...? Oh, yeah, I remember! Soviet Russia, China, Cuba, Nazi Germany, and a bunch of others. That worked nicely, didn't it?
If he means special treatment for the rich and permanent class seperation, I have no clue where he's getting it. In a capitalistic society(another benefit of that "mistake"), you can go from poor to rich with a little luck and a lot of skill. Permanent and semipermanent stratification last occured back in medieval times, and I'm not really sure if that counts.
Disease epidemics: Mr. Diamond is obviously ignorant of one benefit of agriculture that counters this. Most people refer to it as "medicine." We now have cures for almost all infectious diseases, and medicine that helps counter almost everything else. Not possible without agriculture.
Famines: Again, he is obviously clueless to the fact that there has not been a major famine in developed areas for hundreds of years. I think we can all agree that agriculture prevents starvation rather than increases it.
Warfare: I sincerely hope that he's kidding with this one. Indians, people. When European settlers first arrived, the majority of Indian tribes were hunter-gatherers. Funny thing, they still killed each other. I am amazed that anyone can take this guy seriously.
Class stratification: The problem with this claim is that it's so stinking vague. If he means loosely defined "classes" as in, upper, middle, and lower class in terms of income, too bad. It's a fact of life. Some people are rich, others are poor. I believe several countries tried to eliminate classes. What were they...? Oh, yeah, I remember! Soviet Russia, China, Cuba, Nazi Germany, and a bunch of others. That worked nicely, didn't it?
If he means special treatment for the rich and permanent class seperation, I have no clue where he's getting it. In a capitalistic society(another benefit of that "mistake"), you can go from poor to rich with a little luck and a lot of skill. Permanent and semipermanent stratification last occured back in medieval times, and I'm not really sure if that counts.
Disease epidemics: Mr. Diamond is obviously ignorant of one benefit of agriculture that counters this. Most people refer to it as "medicine." We now have cures for almost all infectious diseases, and medicine that helps counter almost everything else. Not possible without agriculture.
Famines: Again, he is obviously clueless to the fact that there has not been a major famine in developed areas for hundreds of years. I think we can all agree that agriculture prevents starvation rather than increases it.
Warfare: I sincerely hope that he's kidding with this one. Indians, people. When European settlers first arrived, the majority of Indian tribes were hunter-gatherers. Funny thing, they still killed each other. I am amazed that anyone can take this guy seriously.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)