I understand that climate change is blamed for more snow and rain as warming temperatures cause more evaporation...but how do they explain that the month of January saw temperatures in many parts of the US to be more than 30 degrees BELOW average winter temps...eagerly awaiting that bit of mumbo-jumbo explanation to come out...

"They" claim that it is colder due to climate change and if you do not believe it you are anti-science and a hater.

It is a climate change, it is colder.

They are not calling it Global Warming, jeesh, get with the lingo, now they can't be wrong no matter what.

They include readings from all over the planet including the oceans and compare it to historical data that did not include the oceans and there you go.

Actually I have no idea, but I know my car is frozen and will not start again. It is sitting in the bank parking lot this time for maximum embarrassment..

I don't subscribe the man-made religion that is climate change.

the climate is changing, no doubt...yesterday was cold and raining, today is less cold and sunny...that, of course, is change...I bet tomorrow it is different form today's weather too...

caused by man? not a chance...

hey, anyone remember the horrible impact that hairspray and other products in aerosol cans were going to cause the ozone layer back in the 70s? where they were eating a hole and we were all going to burn up and die by the early 90s? yeah, that didn't happen either...

See, the great thing about science is it's true whether you believe it or not. Dont gotta rely on faith if there's evidence.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100505-science-environment-ozone-hole-25-years/

www.businessinsider.com/cold-weather-doesnt-discredit-climate-change-2014-11





What you're describing (the day to day change) is the weather. And it's going to fluctuate. But the concern with the CLIMATE is the long term trends. A month doesn't change that.

It's like saying you aren't going to invest for retirement because the stock market is down the last month. yes, but long-term the trend goes up.

The last Ice age was about 22,000 years ago and I do not believe that that it was caused by driving a SUV or charging in an iPad.

Real science is as true as honest yet fallible man can make it. The manipulative junk science that is global warming/climate change is a deliberate deception swallowed by suckers.

Climate change is cyclical. There is so much group-think involved with the global warming/climate change thingy, as well as corruption/dishonesty behind studies that have been done, I have no idea how anyone can believe what has been said.

Should we as humans curtail our polluting of the planet as well as conserve where we can, totally agree. But, buying "carbon credits" and the related made-up hysteria, no way.

Oh, and I heard that all of those Good Samaritan Global Warming/Climate Change heroes who met in Davos, Switzerland, arrived in over 1,700 private jets, which I am sure were all hybrids and had zero carbon footprints.

Hey, why does everyone who is concerned with Climate Change fly around in a private jet? Couldn't be that it's a feeding trough for the wealthy *because* of climate change, could it?
Nah, that's crazy.

and people were a lot hairier 22,000 years ago, so likely their use of hairspray was much greater than today...so that hole should have been huge back then...maybe Pale can confirm for us

And if there isn't evidence, we can use a hockey stick to make it look like there is

I loved when science said the earth revolved around the sun...reefer madness also comes to mind...

see, the problem with science is if you start your research with a target end in mind, then your science simply is done to validate your goal...

Science wasn't the one that tried to supress Galileo and heliocentrism. The original Reefer madness was produced by a church group and then edited by an exploitation filmmaker.

You're right, you shouldn't start with a target end in mind. And that's what's great about science--you get to the truth by going where the evidence takes you. And, yeah, occasionally the prevailing scientific assumptions are wrong, but that's the great thing about science--bring in new evidence and it evolves.

Yes, it's possible that there's another explanation for climate change that will some day surface. But you keep that open mind for everything. We might rethink gravity or relativity later, too. But right now all the evidence we have supports one conclusion. Until other evidence is brough forward, you go with the overwhelmingly likely conclusion.

I have seen enough from the scientific community that says no, we have no conclusive proof...

better yet, the conclusion in place today may be that we have really have no idea what causes it...

ALL the evidence? Is that correct?

well, all the evidence he chooses to read to support his argument, anyway

kind of like someone only reading sports illustrated once a year, when the swimsuit edition is published, and then saying "I don't read sports illustrated because it is only about girls in bikinis"

Just out of curiosity, you guys that dont buy climate change where do you stand on other science denying issues?

GMOs? Vaccinations? Evolution?

If i only went places that supported what i already thought, why would i be here?

Doesn't that essentially go against the very grain of science, actually only believing that there is no other possibity than what has been identified by some scientists?

Have you read about Mann's emails and about how science publications reject papers that do not support the consensus that global warming is caused by man?

Don't cha just love it, the way anyone who doesn't swallow the "correct" ideology is disparaged with catch words like "denier?"

GMO's - No problem.

Vaccinations - A trumped up issue to bludgeon conservatives.

Evolution - A handy theory (it's still a theory by the way) whereby one can throw enough millions of years at a life form and make it develop into anything he so desires. Evolution shares a kinship with global warming in that regard. That evolution is as much an article of faith as is creationism may not be denied. Evolution is so convenient when Man wants to be the highest moral authority.