From Tom Nelson – too good not to share.
More proof that Fraudster Al Gore doesn’t know how to use the Internet
Al’s Journal: June26th, 2011 Ice and Snow Disappearing from Mt. Rainier
The effects of the climate crisis are hitting closer and closer to home:
Deep Snow Delaying Opening of Sunrise Area at Mount Rainier National Park | National Parks Traveler
[June 21, 2011] Too much snow will keep the Sunrise area in Mount Rainier National Park closed through the Fourth of July weekend and until at least July 8, according to park officials. Also, the White River Campground won’t open until July 1.
As the accompanying photos show, there really is a lot of snow still waiting to melt away at Sunrise.
And it isn’t just Washington:
Western snow pack is well above normal, Squaw Valley sets new all time snow record
And here’s Willis complete and thorough debunking of another recent snowfall study claiming reduction in snowpack: Gotta Admire The Chutzpah
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
PhilJourdan says @ur momisugly June 27, 2011 at 10:33 am “MR, your response is a strawman. The quote you repeated said nothing about “climate science”, but rather Al Gore.”
No – not really. Many here use Gore as a proxy for modern climate science, so it is relevant.
But, in the spirit of your response and if everyone here is going to hold themselves to a higher standard of accuracy here (meaning no “anyone who doesn’t doubt the science is a left wing one world government blah blah blah) I’ll respond more specifically.
That is still a strawman unless you can show that Gore has publicly and repeatedly said that there is no natural variability.
_Jim says @ur momisugly June 27, 2011 at 10:26 am “Whereas reality is indicating something different: Deep Snow Delaying Opening of Sunrise Area at Mount Rainier National Park | National Parks Traveler”
So one mountain is proof of what exactly? That is just as bogus as the weather vs climate mistake often made.
@ur momisugly _Jim – my apologies. I missed the quote being from his actual post which makes the earlier response above inaccurate. I mistook your response for snow on Ranier as being a proxy rather than being directly reference in Gore’s text. Sorry.
What Gore said;
“About 14 percent of the ice and permanent snow atop Washington state’s Mount Rainier melted in the past four decades, a new study suggests. Researchers arrived at that figure by comparing the estimated thickness and extent of ice seen in a 1970 aerial survey with those measured in 2007 and 2008. All but two of the 28 glaciers and snowfields on the mountain have thinned and shortened at their lower edges, and the exceptions probably thickened only because large amounts of rock fell upon the ice in recent years and insulated it from warming temperatures.”
One years heavy snow is unlikely to change the conditions he referenced above.
Well a lot of times, the one who invented it isn’t the best one to be using it. Like for example, suppose a geeky nerd invents a new ray gun, or flying car. Do you really want the awkward weak nerd operating this dangerous equipment? No, not really. The confident and strong (if non-intellectual) alpha type is much more suited for action and application of said dangerous equipment. And Al is like. . . oh never mind.
Now, now, we really don’t know that the Goracle (I like how that has a simile with icicle, at least philosophically) wrote the article, or indeed if he actually writes anything himself at all. It was possibly a staff drone, and I’m sure someone, somewhere, has a computer model that would prove this hypotheses……..
Clearly the second picture has been photo shopped to disguise the relationship to the first picture.
MR says:
“That is still a strawman unless you can show that Gore has publicly and repeatedly said that there is no natural variability.”
So skeptics must once again prove a negative? Let me rephrase properly:
“That is still a strawman unless you can show that Gore has publicly and repeatedly said that natural variability is the reason for the mild warming since the LIA.”
Fixed.
Notice the date to the Washington Post article he links to:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/science/mount-rainier-has-lost-14-percent-of-its-ice-and-snow/2011/06/07/AGMXFdTH_story.html
Then check out the realtime link
http://www.google.com/search?q=Ice+and+Snow+Disappearing+from+Mt.+Rainier&hl=en&sa=X&tbs=tl:1,tlul:1995,tluh:2011,tl_num:20&prmd=ivnsb&ei=YcoITuHhC5OatwfWjozlDQ&ved=0CKoBEMsBKAI&biw=1004&bih=594
I hate when they do that . . . . looks to me like someone is running a news loop!!!!
“When there is a contradiction . . . . check your premises” Ayn Rand
Mt. Washington ski area on Vancouver Island is opening for skiing for a few days July 1st. So I will go skiing in the morning and then head for the beach for some wind surfing and babe watching. Will be a great day.
Again, unless you are their spokesperson, or you can link to their statement, or you are channeling them, your statement is again a strawman. You may “ASSUME” they are, you may even “BELIEVE” they are, but unless they told you they are, your statement is again a non-sequitur.
I see that “Moderate Republican” made it to these forums. We’ve been enlightening a poster with the same name for over a year over on the following newspaper’s blog:
http://orangepunch.ocregister.com/category/environment
[If Moderate Republican continues using pejorative comments regarding WUWT on other forums, such as: “you linked to a known denier site that references the usual denier bad science,” his future comments may be deleted due to bad manners. ~dbs, mod.]
1DandyTroll says:
June 27, 2011 at 10:50 am
____________________________
Pardon, you replied to something which I did not say.
That is all.
I’ll bet there’s lots of things Al doesn’t know. Somebody with a lot of free time on their hands could start a list.
Roy UK says:
June 27, 2011 at 5:15 am
I am sorry but there is no link between what Al Gore is stating on his website, and what this report is stating. ie he (or the washington post story) states that snow/ice has reduced 14% over the last 40 years.
Tacoma Water and Power has kept track of snowpack on Mt Rainier since 1935. Mt Rainier is the primary ‘water reservoir’ providing both drinking water and hydro power to the City of Tacoma.
Any scientific report based on 1970 to 2008 released in the year 2011 is Cherry Picking. The 2009 and 2010 data are clearly known by various public officials.
Why pick a 38 year time frame…why not a 75 year time frame…why not a 40 year time frame?
Ah, I see our mild-mannered PT is at it again…
The only thing anyone uses al-Gore for is a proxy for all-you-can-eat buffet availability.
In fact, the guy gets EVERYTHING wrong. He’ll dig up the tiniest little “could” from someone who seems to agree with his “cause” and start proclaiming it as truth. Seriously, his ridiculous movie is riddled with inaccuracies and outright falsehoods… which is apparently good enough for Hollywood and good enough for the Academy. He misquotes “climate scientists” all the time, and as far as I can tell a few of them would be more than willing to distance themselves from him.
In this case, reality ONCE AGAIN smacks Mr. Gore right in the face. Here he is spreading doom, gloom, and alarm over horrible snow losses, right at a time when snow is at record levels. That’s on the same intellectual level as, say, 0bama complaining about Reagan driving up the deficit. It’s just… wrong… and upside down.
Here’s the thing, PT M.R.: YOU don’t get to define “climate”, and neither does al-Gore. Climate is an average. Not a cherry picked average from 1917 to 1924, or whatever seems to show your point. An AVERAGE. You average out long-term weather up to and including today, you have Climate. Stopping the averaging at 2008 or choosing a start point right at a high point of a long-term climate oscillation is dishonest. This is actually a very simple concept. I’m pretty sure my cat could grasp it, but I KNOW a 6-year old that understands it.
Either way, snow pack is high all along the Rockies, and although I heard ALL ABOUT the horrible heat wave in the east a few weeks back, since I’ve heard nothing since I have to assume it’s over and done? We have only had 2 days this year above 75F… brrr…
PhilJourdan says @ur momisugly June 27, 2011 at 11:33 am “Again, unless you are their spokesperson, or you can link to their statement, or you are channeling them”
PhilJourdan says @ur momisugly June 27, 2011 at 8:02 am “The more Gore Fails, the larger his credentials become for the progressives.The more Gore Fails, the larger his credentials become for the progressives.”
Seems pretty clear there, no Phil? Or how about a quick sampling elsewhere here;
brc says @ur momisugly June 22, 2011 at 6:42 pm “The fact is Gore and his ilk…”
JJB MKI says @ur momisugly June 22, 2011 at 6:54 pm “Gore and fellow doom-fetishists…”
Roger Sowell says @ur momisugly June 22, 2011 at 9:52 pm “Al Gore and his minions…”
Paul Nevins says @ur momisugly June 23, 2011 at 7:24 am “Al Gore and his crew”
Moderate Republican, question:
Do you have a normal job? Or do you just sit in your mom’s basement and troll thru climate blogs?
Yes or No? ☺
Unless you think he is perfect – and can never fail – he has failed. So again, you are creating a strawman. Had I ennumerated his failures, you would be free to disagree with my list. However since I merely talked about his failures in general, you can either agree that he has failed (2k comes to mind as one failure – he did not win his home state), or disagree. Or use a non-sequitur strawman – which you chose to do the latter. So argue with yourself. You are not apparently debating anything I said.
Say Smokey… did you wander through the OCRegister link posted above? Apparently this is a full time occupation for, as one person calls him, “moderate fake republican”.
Once again, though, I am truly in awe at the post just above yours. In it, attempting to demonstrate that realists (oh sorry, d-word people) take al-Gore as representative of “climate science”, he simply spews a few quotes back that have nothing to do with what he’s supposedly trying to show.
If I had someone like al-Gore on MY side, I’d seriously consider switching sides. Or at the very least, distancing myself from that person. He doesn’t even represent mainstream (fabricated) “climate science”… he just represents himself.
Apparently in PT land, it’s absolutely against the rules to ever admit you are wrong about anything, not even the slightest point, in spite of the fact that your incorrectness is glaringly, blatantly obvious to everyone who even casually glances at it.
Luther Wu says:
June 27, 2011 at 6:46 am
Roy UK says:
June 27, 2011 at 5:15 am
_________________________________________
Roy, check out the links (especially Willis’ link) at top o’ this page…
Thank you Luther, I was rushing this morning and could not read all of the links thoroughly. I have now read through Willis’ post and understand.
I am no scientist, but I eyeballed the charts and realise there is a lot of seasonal variation but no “death spiral” to see in the graphs.
Actually there is no change at all as far as I can see. How can a scientist be allowed to publish a paper full of nonsense and cherry picking of dates?
This just in: Due to disruptions in the Weather, there will be no Climate this summer.
Al Gore cites: national newspaper coverage of peer reviewed study.
Watts Up With That cites: random dude with a camera phone.
WUWT FTW?
Climate Majority,
Al Einstein was just a random dude with a pencil and paper, opposed by an open letter signed by 100 scientists telling the world that the Theory of Relativity was wrong.
Same-same.
@Luther Wu says:
June 27, 2011 at 12:04 pm
1DandyTroll says:
June 27, 2011 at 10:50 am
____________________________
Pardon, you replied to something which I did not say.
That is all.
Well, well, well, of course you didn’t and no mercy for the wicked, sorry. It should’ve been directed to:
@Moderate Republican says:
“climate science isn’t saying that nothing should change. Climate science is warning that the rate and cause that are different now…”
Actually that’s a simplification. Climate science isn’t warning that at all. Some climate scientist, and a whole lot of CAGW believers, are saying and warning about that though, yet without actually proving anything.
Rational climate scientists on the other hand aren’t warning anyone of CAGW because there’s no proof of any such thing.
Why warn about something that there is no proof of?
PhilJourdan says @ur momisugly June 27, 2011 at 1:12 pm “Unless you think he is perfect – and can never fail – he has failed. So again, you are creating a strawman. ”
Um, no. You are misusing the concept of a Strawman.
Odd that you’d jump to the y2k election as a response.