Drudge Re-Tells Lame Global Warming Joke
Drudge Re-Tells Lame Global Warming Joke
In January 2004, Matt Drudge began a wave of laughter on the right with this observation, which he dubbed “the biggest gaffe in years.”
Three years later, he’s resurrected the joke:
Whatever you think of the joke, the sad fact is that many on the right think this is actually proof that global warming isn’t occurring. It’s not.
Weather is current events. Climate is history. The three years that have passed since Drudge’s first joke have been among the hottest ever recorded in human history. Scientists believe 2007 will be even hotter. The National Academy of Sciences reported last year that Earth’s rising temperature “is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia,” and that “human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming.”
The fact that temperatures have swung from extreme to extreme — in New York, from all-time-high 70 degree weather in January to record-high snowfall one month later — is exactly what increasing greenhouse gas emissions predicts: climate destabilization.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yup, Drudge is a rightwing tool. I hope his boyfriend writes a book soon.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:06 pmWell, he who laughs last…
Except there is really nothing to laugh about. Not even about Drudge’s sheer stupidity.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:08 pm*
this is why it’s so important to push the correct term:
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
…
February 14th, 2007 at 9:09 pmDrudge is a pederast….i know its not cool to make accusations, but if ya actually look into this it is truth.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:11 pmDrudge is his name and a description of what he writes.
Someone used to have a running list of how many times Drudge has got it wrong, can’t find the link now. Maybe the list got too long heh.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:14 pmAlso, I have heard of the government’s spraying of certain chemicals into the atmosphere to cool and offset the burning-off of the ozone layer. While it works in the short run, it hastens the inevitable process and in the end, only makes it worse. So, even if one is careful to drink clean water and eat healthy food, one is at the mercy of the government. We are all breathing impure particles floating in the air from this spray.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:15 pm#4 The only thing that matters is that he will not fight the smear. So he must be a pederast.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:16 pmThis idiot Drudge seem to think the more he tells this joke the funnier it gets? It wasnt even funny to begin with and he now trots this joke out into the public eye once again?
Truly a sign of desperation.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:20 pmI was under the belief that increased hot weather caused increased precipitation, which would cause colder weather in certain regions at certain times.
An article I read talked about how snow would be disappearing, in the lower regions of the Swiss Alps, but increasing in the higher regions.
I think that the global weather system is far too complex to encapsulate into a a short media blurb, which is ultimately Drudge’s “stock in trade”.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:20 pmI don’t know about all of the rest of you but I thought the Bush looking under his desk was hilarious too. I am telling you…righties have a twisted view on humor.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:22 pm#6 – Liberal in New Mexico,
February 14th, 2007 at 9:26 pmThat’s outside the box! The only chemicals being mass-injected into the atmosphere by the Feds are from the shuttle solid fuel boosters and jet fuel.
Even if climate destabilization wasn’t expected (which it is), there’s variation involved whether the overall measure is trending up or down. But since Drudge and his ilk don’t appreciate stuff like science or math, I look forward to their concession the next time any daily temperature anywhere in the United States is above the historical average. Idiots.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:30 pmIn the southwest dessert of New Mexico, Eagle Nest broke a previous 1951 record of minus thirty-two degrees. Also last month, Santa Fe recieved twenty-five inches of snow in a two-day snow storm, breaking a record originally set in 1959. Some snow drifts were six-eight feet high. This is in the southwest dessert, not someplace in New York or Minnesota. We don’t even have snowplows out here in most towns, for crying out loud.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:31 pmI have heard of the government’s spraying of certain chemicals into the atmosphere to cool and offset the burning-off of the ozone layer.
Comment by Liberal in New Mexico — February 14, 2007 @ 9:15 pm
This sounds a lot like the urban legend about Chemtrails.
Do not put too much stock in it.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:34 pmI check out rightwinger sites from time to time. The other day I was on a site that reports alot of military info and news about iraq. There was a members list with links to their personal blogs. I was checking them out and several had pictures of winter time with rediculous captions like “What global warming”. They seriously think it means the whole world will become a fiery desert or something.
Its about throwing the atmosphere out of balance which causes unusually dangerous weather patterns. Not to mention equal and opposite reaction. There WILL be payback (reaction) for the industrialized changes we are making to this world.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:38 pm#11- Not true. Chemicals are, in fact, being sprayed into the atmosphere to try and correct the burning-off of the ozone. That’s a fact. Not all the contrails you see are from passenger aircraft. The spraying does initially cool off the atmosphere but once the particles are dispersed, the ozone is even warmer than it was before.
February 14th, 2007 at 9:40 pmGood news. Many countries are ignoring the right-wing whackos and doing something about CO2 emissions. As I noted on my blog the other day:
“On nuclear power plants, the real choice in alternative clean and safe energy to fight global climate change, China is on track to build two new nuclear reactors every year for the next 14 years. Japan, which is only the size of California, is building 11 new nuke plants … India wants to build up to 20 new plants … and Russia is shooting for at least 42. Even in Australia, which currently has no nuclear power, the Prime Minister is pushing a plan to build 25 nuclear power plants. By the way, don’t count on other alternative energy sources. None of them are quite ready yet. Everyone wants to know about the US: About 30 new nuclear plants have been proposed in the U.S. Well, if we can get ‘em by our enviro-crowd. “
February 14th, 2007 at 9:47 pmwhen it was 70 in dec. it was proof of gw, but you morons throw out the lows, lol. con-trails, con-jobs, what effects the weather more, solar winds or my truck?
February 14th, 2007 at 9:55 pmlosers…
Drudge is so hairy, Bigfoot started taking pictures of him.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:01 pm#18 are you contesting global warming science? This is getting to be a very lonely position to occupy these days.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:02 pmThis is a classic example of the wingers infantile thinking. They can’t think large enough or far enough in advance to consider, let alone understand, anything that requires foresight. It’s all about right now – immediate gratification, etc. They are fundamentally selfish and as a result they simply are unable to conceive of anything beyond their own immediate environment.
Drudge and people of his ilk are mental midgets. It really is as simple as that.
.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:06 pmmy guess, spudge, is that is looks old-fashioned newpaper-y…
February 14th, 2007 at 10:08 pmkinda like a tele-type, maybe?
like his hat… it’s a gimmick…
an ugly gimmick, all of it…
when it was 70 in dec. it was proof of gw, but you morons throw out the lows, lol. con-trails, con-jobs, what effects the weather more, solar winds or my truck?
losers…
Comment by fake but accurate
Please post real examples of throwing out the lows.
Awe forget it, if climate change does cause catostrophic effects, you wouldn’t blame yourself.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:11 pmfake but accurate…speak English.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:23 pmFrickin Santo stream of concious crap, fake. Crazy crank.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:24 pmdrudge so ugly he entered ugly contest but judges say sorry no professionals!
February 14th, 2007 at 10:29 pmWay back in College, let me see, William James and the stream of consciousness. Those run-on sentences you have to read 3 times to understand. Pretty good stuff. It did introduce me to the idea that so much is just in our heads, and perception is everything.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:31 pmEveryone wants to know about the US: About 30 new nuclear plants have been proposed in the U.S. Well, if we can get ‘em by our enviro-crowd. “
Comment by The Learning Curve
And the plans for what to do with the nuclear waste?
February 14th, 2007 at 10:35 pm[...] are as tired as the meme “x” is the new “y” (x = red, y = black, etc.). ThinkProgress: In January 2004, Matt Drudge began a wave of laughter on the right with this observation, which he [...]
February 14th, 2007 at 10:38 pmIn my trade we have refrigerants that are greenhouse gasses.
February 14th, 2007 at 10:49 pmThese are all supported by big corps.
R-22 is rated as .05 as a ozone depleting gas and rated as .08 as a greenhouse gas.
It is being phased out as a dangerous refrigerant because it costs too little.
All the new refrigerants are greenhouse gasses, but they make more money for the big corps.
This has nothing to do with the enviroment but everything to do with money.
It is possible that large corporations like Exxon are trying to confuse the debate on global warming in order to continue profiting from the inaction that results.
If that is possible, can we admit it is also possible that politicians (Gore), environmentalists and socialists are also trying to mislead the public (of the certainty of man’s role in global warming) in an attempt to manipulate, and control, economic policies?
February 14th, 2007 at 10:53 pmHow these rethugs dispute 2+2=4 is beyond my abilities to understand.
February 14th, 2007 at 11:01 pmNakedEmperor sez:
February 14th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
NakedEmperor sez:
This is how:
February 14th, 2007 at 11:18 pm
Comment by paul — February 14, 2007 @ 10:53 pm
::sigh::
Yes, paul. Global warming is not happening; it is all a product of a vast communist, Islamic radical, and liberal conspiracy to take over the world.
The vast majority of climate scientists are, of course, part and parcel of this conspiracy because they are trying, you know, to manipulate and control economic policies.
Why, even the IPCC is part of that conspiracy. They have fabricated all their evidence, and all their conclusions are phony.
/sarcasm off
February 14th, 2007 at 11:18 pm#16 – Liberal in New Mexico,
February 14th, 2007 at 11:31 pmHow the heck can you advocate the burning off of the Ozone layer when the primary contributor to the depletion of this protective layer is sourced- to Chloral-Fluorine gasses? These are the gasses that are being emitted by us for our pure comfort.
Chemicals are, in fact, being sprayed into the atmosphere to try and correct the burning-off of the ozone. That’s a fact.
Comment by Liberal in New Mexico — February 14, 2007 @ 9:40 pm
Can we get a link to examine this fact, please?
February 14th, 2007 at 11:44 pm“Scientists believe 2007 will be even hotter”
What scientists and when is it going to begin? You are a bunch of fools!
February 14th, 2007 at 11:59 pm“#
Yup, Drudge is a rightwing tool. I hope his boyfriend writes a book soon.
Comment by JPark — February 14, 2007 @ 9:06 pm”
Is this your only contribution to refuting Drudge?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:00 am“Except there is really nothing to laugh about. Not even about Drudge’s sheer stupidity.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — February 14, 2007 @ 9:08 pm”
Care to point out his stupidity to those of us who don’t share your radical views?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:02 am“this is why it’s so important to push the correct term:
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
…
Comment by katy — February 14, 2007 @ 9:09 pm”
And what do you mean by that? Elaborate, if you can?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:03 am“#
Drudge is a pederast….i know its not cool to make accusations, but if ya actually look into this it is truth.
Comment by Vance — February 14, 2007 @ 9:11 pm”
And I suppose you can explain?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:04 am“#
Drudge is his name and a description of what he writes.
Someone used to have a running list of how many times Drudge has got it wrong, can’t find the link now. Maybe the list got too long heh.
Comment by Wayne — February 14, 2007 @ 9:14 pm”
Can’t wait for you to find it?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:05 amGregor Samsa. I appreciate your sacasm. But I would suggest that some skeptism might be in order, when you consider other doomsday predictions of the past that have fizzeled. After the book silent spring, we were all going to die from chemicals; in the 60s and 70s there were scares of overpopulation that would lead to worldwide famine and chaos. Time and Newsweek reported 25 years ago of the coming ice age. I also had a professor in the 80s that assured me that the Japanese would become so economically powerful in the future, that they would virtually take over the U.S. and relegate Americans to be their servants. There are reasons to be skeptical when people begin predicting doom.
Many here may believe that the debate on global warming and it’s causes are over. If the evidence is so iron clad, and irrefutable, why are there still so many unconvinced?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:05 am“#
Also, I have heard of the government’s spraying of certain chemicals into the atmosphere to cool and offset the burning-off of the ozone layer. While it works in the short run, it hastens the inevitable process and in the end, only makes it worse. So, even if one is careful to drink clean water and eat healthy food, one is at the mercy of the government. We are all breathing impure particles floating in the air from this spray.
Comment by Liberal in New Mexico — February 14, 2007 @ 9:15 pm”
UNBELIEVABLE comment! How does the coolaid taste? Did you know Jim Jones?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:07 am“#
This idiot Drudge seem to think the more he tells this joke the funnier it gets? It wasnt even funny to begin with and he now trots this joke out into the public eye once again?
Truly a sign of desperation.
Comment by rachel — February 14, 2007 @ 9:20 pm”
Very easy accusation to make, now try backing it up?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:08 am“Even if climate destabilization wasn’t expected (which it is)”
And you can somehow back this up?
February 15th, 2007 at 12:11 am“In the southwest dessert of New Mexico, Eagle Nest broke a previous 1951 record of minus thirty-two degrees. Also last month, Santa Fe recieved twenty-five inches of snow in a two-day snow storm, breaking a record originally set in 1959. Some snow drifts were six-eight feet high. This is in the southwest dessert, not someplace in New York or Minnesota. We don’t even have snowplows out here in most towns, for crying out loud.”
Sure signs of liberal global WARMING!
February 15th, 2007 at 12:12 amIf the evidence is so iron clad, and irrefutable, why are there still so many unconvinced?
Comment by paul — February 15, 2007 @ 12:05 am
None of the instances you list involved the same wide consensus in the scientific community: Time and Newsweek are hardly scientific publications, “Silent Spring” was not peer-reviewed, etc.
Why are so many unconvinced? I obviously don’t know for sure, but I would guess it is For the same reason many still refuse to accept the theory of evolution: They refuse to look at the facts, and the evidence.
Why, there are even some who still oppose vaccination.
February 15th, 2007 at 12:21 am“Why are so many unconvinced?”
You’re wasting your time trying to be logical with these people.
February 15th, 2007 at 12:27 amCare to point out his stupidity to those of us who don’t share your radical views?
Comment by michael — February 15, 2007 @ 12:02 am
Because, just like the topic of the thread indicates, The National Academy of Sciences reported last year that Earth’s rising temperature “is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia,†and that “human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming.â€
This was said by the “radicals” at the National Academy of Sciences.
February 15th, 2007 at 12:32 ammichael, these, for a good start… get busy…
figure it out for yourself, if you’re not gonna pay attention here…
http://www.google.com/
http://news.google.com/
http://dictionary.reference.com/
http://thinkprogress.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
http://www.liberaloasis.com/
February 15th, 2007 at 12:36 am.
michael – these are a good start…
figure it out for yourself – if you can’t listen and learn here at TP…
http://www.google.com/
February 15th, 2007 at 12:53 amhttp://news.google.com/
http://dictionary.reference.com/
http://www.liberaloasis.com/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
fyi – excuse the double post…
BOTH appeared at the same time 12:01 central time…
g’nite.
February 15th, 2007 at 12:55 amTP, your clocks are slow… 12:06am central.
February 15th, 2007 at 12:58 amI need global warming. -5 here in Nebraska….
February 15th, 2007 at 1:05 amAnd what do you mean by that? Elaborate, if you can?
Comment by michael — February 15, 2007 @ 12:03 am
Here is michael, once again, trying to debate reality.
The term Climate Change is replacing Global Warming because it helps better explain the fact that our planet’s climate is changing beyond warmer temperatures.
And because I know you will ask me to back up my statement -even though you will refuse to click on the link- here is the link to the EPA’s Climate Change page.
You know, those “radicals” at the US EPA.
February 15th, 2007 at 1:10 am“Because, just like the topic of the thread indicates, The National Academy of Sciences reported last year that Earth’s rising temperature “is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia,†and that “human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming.â€
This was said by the “radicals†at the National Academy of Sciences.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — February 15, 2007 @ 12:32 am”
And so how do you explain the cooling that took place 30 years ago and is happening today?
February 15th, 2007 at 1:12 am“http://www.google.com/
http://news.google.com/
http://dictionary.reference.com/
http://www.liberaloasis.com/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
Comment by katy — February 15, 2007 @ 12:53 am”
Katy, liberaloasis and mediamatters? These are your sources? What grade are you in? 3rd?
February 15th, 2007 at 1:16 am“The term Climate Change is replacing Global Warming”
8 feet of snow in the east, cancellation of global warming conventions? Feel a bit stupid?
February 15th, 2007 at 1:19 ammichael, don’t try to convince us that global warming (or global climate change) isn’t happening simply because your controllers told you so. All you do is parrot whatever it is they espouse for that day. Rush says Barack Obama isn’t black so you parrot him. Squawk!, Obama isn’t black, squawk! Hannity says that people against the war aren’t patriotic and hate America. Squawk!, people against the war aren’t patriotic and hate America, squawk! Drudge says there is no global warming because there is snow in winter. Squawk!, there is no global warming because there is snow in winter, squawk!
You are nothing but a foolish automaton. You know nothing about global warming because you are afraid to read about it and learn for yourself how and why it is happening. One thing you would find out is that it will cause temperature and weather extremes in all seasons, not just summer. Why are most glaciers melting at alarming rates? Why are the ice shelves of Antarctica breaking apart and melting? Why is the same thing happening above the arctic circle? If you have some knowledge as to why these things, among others, are happening then I suggest you contact any one of the world’s leading climatologists, all of which agree that climate change is happening, and inform them that they are all wrong. I’m sure they would be anxious to here about your knowledge and findings on this matter asap!
February 15th, 2007 at 1:23 amAnd so how do you explain the cooling that took place 30 years ago and is happening today?
Comment by michael — February 15, 2007 @ 1:12 am
Must I go back to the basics with you?
30 years ago there seemed to be a cooling period. The evidence was inconclusive and there never was scientific consensus over the significance of the evidence. I already pointed out to paul that Time and Newsweek are no scientific publications.
There is no “cooling” period today. Some areas experience unseasonably low temperatures but, had you bothered to read the topic of the thread, you’d know that the “fact that temperatures have swung from extreme to extreme [...] is exactly what increasing greenhouse gas emissions predicts: climate destabilization”.
Did you follow the link to the National Academy of Sciences? Or to the Environment Protection Agency?
February 15th, 2007 at 1:24 am8 feet of snow in the east, cancellation of global warming conventions? Feel a bit stupid?
Comment by michael — February 15, 2007 @ 1:19 am
If you had followed the link to the National Academy of Sciences, you would have found out that this is the explanation that they give -you know, those “radicals” at the Academy.
Feel a bit stupid?
February 15th, 2007 at 1:26 amGregor, michael is searching for a comment by one of his controllers to parrot. Squawk!
February 15th, 2007 at 1:28 amMr. Evil,
No kidding. He hasn’t bothered to read the topic of the thread to even try to make a coherent argument.
He makes much fuss about backing up one’s arguments, but he certainly is a little wanting in that department. Nothing there beyond rhetoric.
February 15th, 2007 at 1:31 am#58: 8 feet of snow in the east, cancellation of global warming conventions? Feel a bit stupid?
It’s actually more like twelve feet of snow in some places in upstate New York. Do you actually think huge snowstorms somehow prove that global warming isn’t happening?
February 15th, 2007 at 1:34 amDo you actually think huge snowstorms somehow prove that global warming isn’t happening?
Comment by Luke — February 15, 2007 @ 1:34 am
My eight ball says “yes – he is that dense”
February 15th, 2007 at 1:35 amMake that 12 feet of lake effect snow that usually occur with southerly winds on the southern shores of the Great Lakes, not on the eastern shores. I just read that. I didn’t get it from Rush or Sean or Matt or Bill or even, michael, squawk!!!
February 15th, 2007 at 1:45 amJust when michael was to succomb to the truth, based on facts, he, like all the other automaton trolls, has left the building!
February 15th, 2007 at 1:49 am“Scientists believe 2007 will be even hotterâ€
What scientists and when is it going to begin? You are a bunch of fools!
Comment by michael — February 14, 2007 @ 11:59 pm
“What scientists”!? You couldn’t even be bothered to click on a link!?
Well, this explains all you asinine questions in this -and every other- thread, and your drive-by trolling style.
You know, for all those years of private education you like to brag about, you certainly don’t have much to show for them. Perhaps you should ask for your money back?
February 15th, 2007 at 2:20 amHow to have your cake and eat it too, I give you Nico:
Weather is current events. Climate is history.
Then:
The fact that temperatures have swung from extreme to extreme — in New York, from all-time-high 70 degree weather in January to record-high snowfall one month later — is exactly what increasing greenhouse gas emissions predicts: climate destabilization.
So weather is current events… except when it’s useful to substantiate anthropogenic global warming. Yeah, that’s what I thought. You guys are a bunch of lame hypocrites.
Oh, and just for the record, why exactly would increasing greenhouse gas emissions make the weather “unstable”? I thought it was all about the warming. Why would greenhouse gases cause it to be warm in January and cold in February? Anyone want to relate to me this phenomenon that, if I may suggest, Nico has pulled out of his posterior region?
February 15th, 2007 at 6:58 amMr. Evil:”michael, don’t try to convince us that global warming (or global climate change) isn’t happening simply because your controllers told you so. All you do is parrot whatever it is they espouse for that day.”
If only you saw the immense irony in that statement…
February 15th, 2007 at 7:00 am“Weather is current events. Climate is history.”
That’s beautifully put!
February 15th, 2007 at 7:16 amDrudge is a guttersnipe. Always will be.
February 15th, 2007 at 8:48 amOh my god, I can’t believe 85% of Republicans don’t believe global warming is happening.
This is crux of the problem with people on the right: THEY’RE MORONS!!!
February 15th, 2007 at 9:25 amYou know something, we’ve been handed an unlikely boom in the Republics’ terming of global warming as “global climate change.” As much as they may not see global WARMING, it’s apparent to everyone who’s had 70-degree days in December, ice storms in April, and tornadoes in hurricane country that the climate IS changing. Why not take their term and embrace it?
February 15th, 2007 at 9:28 amIts important to make the point that global warming can lead to hot and COLD extremes around the world. As mentioned in a couple of posts earlier. An slight increase in global temps can lead to changing weather patterns that result in extreme colds in places not accustomed to it.
As progressives, we need to get out of the hot/cold temp arguments that conservatives like to get into, and focus of climate change.
February 15th, 2007 at 9:49 am#69: So weather is current events… except when it’s useful to substantiate anthropogenic global warming. Yeah, that’s what I thought. You guys are a bunch of lame hypocrites.
Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that we’re all a bunch of hypocrites. How would this show that anthropogenic climate change is not, in fact, happening? Or are you just hoping that with enough ad hominem attacks, you can make the problem go away (at least in your own mind)?
February 15th, 2007 at 10:30 amActually, the heavy snow around the Great Lakes recently is directly due to warming.
Because it was so warm in December and January, the lakes didn’t freeze. As soon as the jet stream shifted south, any sort of polar air mass moving in would pull all kinds of moisture and dump it to the east and south of the lake.
If it were colder earlier when it should have been, there would have been much less snow. Completely predictable, really…
February 15th, 2007 at 10:31 amActually, its been pretty stable for my climate. It was consistently 20 degrees above average for a month straight.
And now its been about 20 degrees below average (brrrrrr) for about a month straight.
bizarre. But still, I won’t make generalizations and all I can conclude is neither side knows what its talking about. I could pull up 5 articles with facts that prove three or four completely different viewpoints.
Until someone makes a full 100% accurate conclusion all I’ll say is this: “I don’t care if it is or isn’t true or whether or not it was caused by humans. If for no other reason, I would really like clean air.”
February 15th, 2007 at 11:59 amThis “joke” is like someone saying that Tiger Woods can’t be such a great golfer since he always has the lowest score. It displays breathtaking ignorance. By the way, Drudge and Limbaugh are not the only ones to latch onto this bit of idiocy – someone at the NY Times (O’Dowd?) did it too, with a patronizing “poor Al Gore can’t get a break, he spoke about global warming on the coldest day in years” quip. Well, it was twofer – slam Al Gore AND his pet project all at once.
February 15th, 2007 at 12:30 pmRighties have a funny grasp on science. Remember, they’re the same bunch that said Terri Schiavo was going to jump up and appear on “Dancing With the Stars” at any minute. Reagan famously accused trees of being the biggest polluters in CA.
Their opinions of the work done by climate scientists is hardly worthy of consideration, unless you’re the type that gets their movie reviews from sportscasters and their footbal commentary from cooking show hosts.
February 15th, 2007 at 12:34 pmDo Republicans think they can somehow intimidate global warming by smearing it?
Is this truly the peak of their intellect?
February 15th, 2007 at 1:32 pmDrudge on global warming is just emblematic of the disease, on the left and right, that is tearing this country apart. The disease is that the game is about prevailing with your point of view and truth be damed……
jon….For an irreverent response to climate change report, see http://EcosystemCollapse.com/ellen.html
February 15th, 2007 at 2:20 pmGlobal Warming isn’t a result of human activity.
Many people here should read an alternate view point.
Times Online
An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece
Real Clear Politics: 3 articles on the media and global warming
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/search/?query=Global+Hot+Air&x=0&y=0
Global Warming – Opposing Viewpoints
Global Warming Does Not Pose a Serious Threat 
S. Fred Singer
pgs 30-32:
Although the mass media have come to a consensus on global warming, the scientific community has not. Surface temperature data do show a warming since about 1850, the end of the “Little Ice Age,†but most of it occurred before 1940, after which the climate cooled for more than three decades. Weather satellite data, the only truly global measurements, show no current warming, in direct disagreement with the best computer-created climate model predictions. Critics can say “garbage in, garbage out†regarding the computer predictions, but climate models are the only tools available for predicting future climate conditions. Unless validated by scientific observations, the models cannot justify drastic actions that will inevitably lead to economic decline, to solve a “problem†that has not been observed in reality but only predicted by computers fed information by fallible human beings with their own judgments of what is important to consider. No wise person would buy an expensive insurance policy without some evidence of risk. Moreover, renowned economists assure us that a warming of the planet would actually bring benefits, not losses. Agriculture, for example, can only benefit from more rain with fewer severe storms, milder winters, longer growing seasons, and higher levels of carbon dioxide. And contrary to the conventional wisdom, global warming would not speed up the rise of sea level but might actually slow it down because increased evaporation from the oceans leads to more precipitation and increased ice accumulation in the polar regions.
The lack of scientific consensus on the causes and possible effects of global warming is easily demonstrated. Many scientists show “concern†in public but voice doubts in private. Government funding agencies, which support much scientific research, are unlikely to support a proposal unless it expresses deep concern about global warming and explains how the study will save the world. Other scientists don’t have such constraints. The “dwindling band of skeptics†who consider climate warming the “empirical equivalent of the Easter Bunny†(as Al Gore put it) is growing rapidly. In fact, a real thorn in Gore’s side is the “Leipzig Declaration,†which grew out of a scientific conference held in that city in November 1995 and has been signed by more than a hundred climate scientists. After highlighting the shaky science supporting the global warming scare and the absence of any scientific consensus, it concluded: “In a world in which poverty is the greatest social pollutant, any restriction on energy use that inhibits economic growth should be viewed with caution. For this reason, we consider ‘carbon taxes’ and other drastic control policies—lacking credible support from the underlying science—to be ill-advised, premature, wrought with economic danger, and likely to be counter-productive.†A group of broadcast meteorologists and a number of state climatologists have signed similar documents. Even more impressive is the 1998 “Oregon Petition†against the Kyoto Protocol, which was signed by nearly 20,000 scientists.
End of passage.
OK. I am ready to be attacked.
February 15th, 2007 at 5:10 pmFLASH!!!!!
February 15th, 2007 at 8:26 pmJingoistic Demagogue and repugnantg-repub right wingnut muckraking propagandist Matt Drudge has been found HALF-EATEN on a melting iceberg with a sick-looking polar bear. We bring you to the iceberg for an exclusive interview with the polar bear.
Mr. Polar Bear, why did you eat Matt Drudge?
Bear: I KNEW I SHOULDN’T HAVE SCARFED THAT POISONOUS OFFAL DOWN–NOW I’M DONE FOR–I’VE GOT PTOMAINE POISONING!
[...] course that does not disprove the theory of Global warming as the left wing bloggers were quick to point out, but then those same bloggers fell into the same trap by saying that the past 3 years have been the [...]
February 16th, 2007 at 12:09 amJust a few more reasons to doubt global warming.
If “global warming” is real, what could be causing it?
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/cause.htm
Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html
The Greenhouse Myth
February 16th, 2007 at 10:40 amhttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192544,00.html
go jsh!!!read my comments on Hannity attacks Gore on global warming #104
February 16th, 2007 at 7:27 pmHey Nico everyone believed that Katrina would look like childs play in 2006!!What ever the “scientists” say RIGHTO
February 16th, 2007 at 7:39 pmMatt Drudge cannot believed on anything because he is not even honest about his sexuality.
February 27th, 2007 at 12:15 pmLiberal in New Mexico.
Sorry the trails you see in the sky are vapor trails not a government conspiracy to spray chemicals in the air.
Some warm days you don’t see any vapor trails, some very cold days you do. You’d think they’d get those days right if they were spraying chemicals in the air behind passenger planes.
Sorry but that IS confirmed urban legend from conspiracy magazines!
Global Warming IS happening but I wouldn’t call it “WARMING”.
The earth is maintaining a larger dose of heat but earths counter balances are throwing the weather into extremes. By having so much vapor in the air we get more cloud cover,violent torrential storms, and snow storms. There is greater convection of air through the currents that carry the weather across the earth, so expect to see odd weather in places where its never happened before.
These bounces of extremes are the way in which mother earth balances itself out, but we will be the brunt of its furry ( bouncing) in the next century or so. If you have any beach front property, sell it quick while it’s still there!!
February 27th, 2007 at 5:38 pmTried to post earlier. Latest from the Antarctic ice core samples indicates we now have the highest level of CO2 in 82,000 years.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=a5fGvKAGFgFE&refer=canada
February 27th, 2007 at 9:30 pmCATO article by Linden at MIT is fifteen years old.
Junk Science article doesn’t reject fact of global warming, merely questions the reason.
The concensus of qualified scientists seem to be in agreement: global warming is real, and man is playing a significant role. In my opinion, the biggest naysayers are motivated by corporate fears of financial loss if restrictions are put in place. The counter argument is that new technologies (including R & D) will more than compensate for a retreat from a petroleum based economy.
February 27th, 2007 at 9:56 pmThere’s an old saying..”he who raises his fist FIRST…is out of ideas” It’s sad that hewre,,,in Anerica…that any opposing viewpoints are immediately slammed with personal insults from the Lefty Socialists. I would question why the earth heated up in the PAST…when there WAS no industrialized nations to blame it on.
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:18 pmThe mainstream thinking is presently that the globe will warm by a few degrees over the next century or so. But please remember (or for those children aong you who cannot remember)…there was a “scientific consensus in the 1970’s that the “earth was entering another ice age!!!”
ansd there was once a consensus that the earth was flat too.
Global warming, OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You global warmiacs crack me up.
I can’t even get an accurate temperature forecast for my city 10 days in advance, yet Al Gore’s rental scientist can now accurately forecast the weather and climate for the entire world for the next 100 years.
There’s also a neat little political plan to save the planet that buys and sells CO2 credits for redistribution of wealth around the world, aka socialism. Wake up folks, Al Gore doesn’t care about our environment. If he really does he should stop flying around in his private jet producing more pollutants per round trip flight than the average household consumes in an entire year.
BTW, I am not a republican, even though I know the far lefties will immediately pounce me as some big oil brainwashed ignorant neocon, its the only lefty solution for facing people who don’t want to play in their globaloney warming circus.
March 11th, 2007 at 2:03 pmglobal warming is a girlie man, homo
March 13th, 2007 at 6:16 amagenda…its something little girls believe in.
i do all i can to propogate that men who believe
in global warming are really homosexual.
Yeah, I agree. Also, global warming isn’t only indicated by hot weather–weather extremes are a major point, whether hot or cold.
March 15th, 2007 at 5:56 pmOkay, so Drudge is wrong that a snowstorm causing the the cancellation of a ‘global warming’ event is some kind of evidence that global warming is not happening.
I would hope you would also point out all the other instances where a weather event is used to support the theory of global warming. Like, for example, in Al Gore’s movie where he refers to the heat wave in France, or hurricanes…etc.
Personally, I am just glad we turned around “Global Cooling” from the 70’s. Whew!
March 19th, 2007 at 12:24 pmGay Incest Old Gay Men Gay Male Galleries
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 12:40 ammoving and truck rental
Interestingly, this was on CNN last week.
March 29th, 2008 at 3:15 pmYoung Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:36 am[...] his constant, unrelenting assault on the science of global warming, Matt Drudge posts these misleading headlines on the [...]
April 4th, 2008 at 1:19 pmGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 6:54 pmSatellite Direct
Satellite Tv Viewing
April 10th, 2008 at 11:26 pmMy Cracks and Serials
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 13th, 2008 at 9:14 pmGay Sex Gay Sex Videos Black Gay Men
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 12:26 am