This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
White House: "Weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change"
So Obama went to California to talk drought and climate change. He brought some cash with him to help the state cope with the water shortage. The Prez is right to be worried about this drought, after all, Cali is 15% of the US economy. The only question is how big the hit to CA/US GDP is going to be.
The President's new plan is have the Ag department come up with $100 million for cattle farmers. There is also $5m for communities that are literally running out of water. So it's 20 to 1 in favor of the cattlemen. Great plan...
As Obama headed west, the White House's Science Assistant, John Holdren, had this to say about the California drought:
"Weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change"
Really? It's all climate change?
There are many forces that shape weather patterns. One of the most significant is the El Nino/ La Nina cycles. this is what NOAA has to say about the connection between El Nino and rainfall in the South West:
El Niño results in increased precipitation across California and the southern tier of states
The California drought has persisted for the past three years. It's no coincidence that there have been no El Nino conditions during this time period:
The WH has a climate agenda - this is payback for a lot of support (money). Okay, but when the chief scientist at the WH ignores the scientists who actually look at weather patterns, then one is forced to doubt everything the WH says on the topic.
Misdirection By Holdren???
- advertisements -





Two words:
Horse Shit!!!
The earth has been in a cooling phase for the last 17 years.
Really, is that why 2001-2010 is hottest decade on record?
This is why. Surface stations have been improperly sited. I have seen stations constructed in areas that by locating the instruments in a certain location, allowed communites to get a pass on EPA air quality rules. I myself have owned and operated meteorological mast systems with calibrated sensors and shake my head at what has happened. It gets even worse when data from the best stations were eliminated and bad data from poorly sited stations were used to create that hockey stick we all know of.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/surfacestationsreport...
Here is an interactive site that shows you can use 60 rural weather stations to show GW...
http://moyhu.blogspot.com/2014/01/just-60-global-stations-area-weighting...
The UHI has been studied since 1959 and is very well known and understood...
Records? Really? Like tree rings, ice core samples, ad hoc incomplete temperature measurements that are massaged by models put together by grant seeking fanatics with delusions of grandeur? You expect anyone who knows Holdrens history to consider him to be an unbiased scientist? The man should have been locked in a cage 25 years ago.
There is no "record". There is, at best, a mosaic of methodologically inconsistent and imprecise data collected over a few recent decades in an ad hoc and increasingly politicized manner. You can shove your "record", Flunkmeister. I trust these "climatologists" to be scientifically scrupulous about as much as I trust a two dollar crack whore with my wallet. Attempting to control the planets climate by taxing people everytime the turn on a light bulb is the most insanely delusional fraud that has ever been inflicted on the human race, and I mean that literally.
Oh, and if the temperature should happen to rise one or two degrees with more plant food in the atmosphere do you know what will happen? We' ll have a warmer, greener, more well fed planet. You do know what a greenhouse is for, don't you? You arrogant sack of dog manure. The last time I checked people move down to Florida, not up to the Artic when they retire. What a fucking scam. And anytime I see someone post 40 times on "climate change" thread I just assume it's a sock puppet for Michael Scam Mann. If it's not him I'm sure someone's got their fist up your ass.
"The earth has been in a cooling phase for the last 17 years."
Actually, the Earth has been in a cooling phase for the last 4.5 billion years...heh.
You want to see global warming?
Wait another 4.5 billion years.
Everywhere I go we keep hitting record highs, droughts & heat waves. Looks like another record high today. I suppose it doesn't help that I spend most of my time in Phoenix.
Still, 90° in the middle of February is ridiculous.
When you live in a desolate desert....
most El Nino events rarely develop to the degree they predict. this is the strangest year ever in CA, and whatever the jet stream does, it may not move the high pressure (wind currents and weather flow at ground level) which keeps us dry. on the good side we are getting really nice vegetables from Mexico which must be benefitting from the weather too. pretty soon the government will get into the weather business, and that should be interesting. its either that or shoot rockets at Mars which jump start the creation of an atmosphere, we have to spend money (we don't have) on something, and subsidizing water for cattle is really not a very imaginative economic policy.
Greetings from the longest summer in LA since I moved here in '78 from NYC. The last El Nino was in '98 - '99, it rained nearly everyday from January thru March, it sucked. There was one other El Nino before '98 back in the early 80's so they don't happen too often. Right now however having retired 2 years ago I damn sure enjoy this weather, and am sufficiently tan. Not missing whats happening back east at all. Rally-on Janet! Double POMO on Tuesday:-)
did you see Obama backed Alvarez in the SD mayors special election? the race was dead even until that happened, the probusiness republican candidate won by 10%. (maybe Obama could stop global warming by supporting it as well) very strange, the bad news is high fire danger, but the good news is that without rain there is no new growth in the back country which negates the fire danger somewhat. we have also hit some records for low humidity, and El Nino events almost always bring up subtropical and muggy weather. so i ain't buying into it yet.
i have one tomato plant left from last summer, i guess the roots are down in the septic by now, because i don't water it, but its still green and i noticed tiny new tomatoes are forming.
thank god for all the anthropogenic warming that got us out of the last ice age
the 12,000BC chevys got like 2 miles to the gallon and absolutely gouted co2 out the tail pipe
Sorry Bruce, its no secret that God uses the weather to punish mankind when our wickedness angers him. You will note that it is the English speaking world that is suffering drought, bitter cold, flooding, record snow and even freezing rain. England, Australia and the US have seen major movements to legalize homosexual marriage. OTOH the weather in places like Russia, India and Africa which have sought to prohibit, ban or punish homosexual activity have not had such dreadful weather. The evidence to me suggest it is Anglo American and Australian sin that lies behind our inclement weather and sinners like Obama and Cameron are trying to evade their guilt and responsibility by casting blame elsewhere.
PS there was a severe drought in California the last time the Jesuit dropout and metrosexual Jerry Brown was Governor of California. Also and infestation of insect pests and the deadly plague of AIDS ran rampant.
If god was displeased with this or that he/she/it/they could hypothetically issue a press release with carefully worded language to that effect. The indirect approach of shifting the weather around a little is pretty goddamn ineffective so far : for the most part people are looking for more proximate causes for the weather shift, like oh, the sun, or greenhouse gasses, ocean climates, the magnetic field shift, volcanoes, pollutants, interstellar radiation cloud seeding, etc.
Carbon Tax has too much money invested to go away, regardless of reality. The profit and control of governments and populations is way too attractive to back down from the Big Lie. However, the food supply is about as attention getting as it gets, if you want to drive a cause.
The multi year Drought in Cali and Texas may be similar to the 1929-1930s depression era Drought in Oklahoma and Texas. Dam building was all the rage then with Hoover, TVA and others. Stored water. Now, the environmental groups have been strong enough to halt building of more Dams for electrical power generation and water storage reserves during times of shortage. The two major underground lakes, Aquifers, in the San Joaquin Valley and the Texas panhandle were not in play in the 30s. These two major water reserves were not adequately refilled during times of adequate rain and now both are in trouble due to overuse and consequent major drops in water table level. Environmental groups and agencies may be a major reason the water was not replaced. It is like a bank account where you continue to remove assets without replacing then until the assets are gone.
Two buy/store investments for the consumer are Almonds and Beef. Almond trees in the San Joaquin valley need water and Honey Bees to pollinate. Honey bees have a “collapsed” population World Wide except for Australia. I read that Australian bees are being flown to Cali for the Almond polarization. With 30% of our food dependent upon pollinators; this is a real disaster in progress. Domestic production of Cattle/grass without rain has little solution. Importing may be a little solution. Price pressure on beef extends to all meat whither it walks, flies, or swims.
If you want bees, then grow borage and comfrey. The bees will find you no matter how decimated their population is.
Jerry Brown is too busy trying to get his name on a train station (I hope it is the fucking bathroom) instead of building desalination plants.
We call a statement like this
A tautology.
A meaningless tautology.
A meaningless tautology wrapped in an enigma.
In early 1990's, CA had drought too, what's the problem? The problem is this time there is an agenda here. Creditors of .gov debts want a secure payment stream and broader tax base. Climate Change is the best excuse for this scenario.
Is climate change causing all weather or is weather causing climate change?
HEY KRASTING.
Good posting. I have been critical of your stuff in the past but I think you are right on here.
Thanks, dudebro
Rather too much weather around currently.
when i was a kid in the 1950's we had the most horrific winters in Michigan, being near the Big Lake Michigan. & no one thought twice about it, no one dreamed up scams to capitalize on "weather". weather is weather & that's the way it is; some winters are worse than others. it's just normal life, it's not a scam to force us all to pay carbon taxes. let me know when India & China's citizens all pay carbon taxes.
Not too long after that (1970's) there were cries from the same chicken little leftist climate scammers predicting a new ice age in the face of global cooling.
There was no such concensus...
Sorry, but making shit up don;t count for much...
I see no referral to consensus. Quit making things up.
We've always been at war with warming and allied with cooling.
You realize that the per capita emission of India correspond to the US in 1903?
This is misleading. In 1903 the US was coal fired, with huge stack emissions. This is not true in India or in the US now.
Did you really write what you think you wrote?
BTW, the US is still 40% coal fired...
Moron...
note I said "with huge stack emissions". We now have scrubbers with much lower emissions, and 40% ain't quite 100%.
40% of the current US electricity generation dwarfs 100% (and that is a stretch) of what it was in 1903...
http://www.energyliteracy.com/?p=142
You really that mendacious or you are simply stupid...
URL: http://www.energyliteracy.com/?p
Infection: JS:HideLink-A [Trj]I might be stupid, but I don't spread viruses, you bastard.
Yawn...
The alarmist con artist often reverts to ad-hominem personal attacks. So far you are two for two on the con man scale.
Everything covered in soot, that is the way it was 100 years ago in any urban environment in the US. The snow was not white but black as every household in the city had a coal furnace. Now we burn coal in utility boilers with sophisticated emission controls.
Play-doh was invented do remove soot from wallpaper. Because that used to be a common problem at the time. 1920's.
if the US was as backward as india we would have a lower per capita energy use and 1.2BILLION people. that is what socialism creates is billions of people because the system feeds on them but not before it has fattened them up.
Dung-fueled fires for cooking our meals.
Waiting for the tax thata asshole meters will be installed by Obvomber so he can tax my farts
Irrespective of whether one believes, or not, in man-made "pollution" or "global warming", why would a society build:
~ cities in a desert?
~ plant water thirsty landscaping and approve of evaporting pools of water in backyards?
~ wake up now, and not a century ago, to strict water control and water rationing between people and agriculture located in desert locales?
Why hasn't Gov Moonbeam taken this drought seriously and only now impose half hearted water restrictions that achieve little compared to the in-your-face problem coming this summer?
And why does Obama agree? Just to later impose "carbon taxes" on cities and people that are properly designed and considerate of their natural locale? I mean... look at the growth of Las Vegas, Phoenix, Southern California the past 20 years. Should anyone have pity for water situations like these?
This line of thinking is that man should not progress? We should not take advantage of natural resources like warm temperatures, fertile soil, and abundant sunshine? That we HAVE systems in place*to route the one other commodity necessary for utilizing this otherwise useless land and that we have allowed concerns, which can readily be addressed, as an excuse to hobble, if not cripple, the use of this resource?
This should be a non-problem except for ridiculous application of specious environmental laws. We have the know-how and technology to thrive in these environments.
* Cali currently has the ability to cope with five years of drought, but for the strictest application of "environmental" laws.
hmmm... man does live and die by his "systems".
What you write has little relevance. If you do "it" right, it is good. If you do it "wrong", I have the right to laugh at you.
What is this "resource" you are utilizing in building cities in the desert? Cheap land? Then pay up for your water and shut down when there is no water.
And don't hide behind farmers in California. You steal their water, water that provides for the good of mankind, not your willingness to exploit cheap land at the expense of American society.
Climate change is when the weather changes. One day its hot and windy, the next day it rains, the next day its cold. The climate changes every day. So therefore I have proof of climate change.
Climate change does happen. It has happened in the past.
North Africa was once the breadbasket of Rome.
Glaciers once covered New York.
Periodic droughts have occurred in the US Southwest.
Reportedly, polar icecaps and mountain glaciers around the world are shrinking,
and average temperatures are increasing in certain regions (if not globally).
But ... some say, reports to the contrary notwithstanding, climate change has stopped.
The climate now is the same as 100 years ago, and will be the same 50 or 100 years hence.
That position does seem a bit extreme.
Less extreme are those who argue climate change does occur, but there is nothing we can do about it.
Well, "what we can do" is actually two questions.
Whether we can prevent it is different than whether we can prepare for it.
It doesn't seem likely that urbanizing drought-ridden areas, polluting groundwater, cutting down the forests, relentlessly expanding the human population, exterminating the fisheries, etc. would be very helpful.
No need to turn climate change hardships into catastrophes.
So, one might think that most people would be pro-environment. But that doesn't appear to be the case.
Some have contended that human activity not only magnifies the effects of climate change,
but magnifies climate change itself. That ruffled a few feathers. Nobody likes to be blamed for anything.
Much less told to do something about it.
It is hard to plausibly deny that humans are ruining the environment. It is direct. It is obvious.
Unless of course, one is a spokesperson for Big Ag, Big oil, or the nuclear weapons/energy industry.
But human effects on the climate? Indirect. Not so obvious. Lots of room for plausible deniability.
And proposals to lessen the human causes. Even more room for plausible deniability, and fraud too.
So what?
Preparing for climate changes, or preventing environmental damage can be subtly equated with attempting to prevent climate change. Both sides do it, both mistakenly. After all, except for the carbon tax scam, it's pretty much the same.
Thus the debate (conveniently for some), is shifted away from human degradation of the environment,
instead to be just about the climate issue and the degree of human causation.
That's why some like to see everyone distracted by arguing about the weather.
And, just so there is no mis-understanding, every last calorie of every last combustable carbon compound which can be reached, by whatever means, will be burned by this civilization in the absence of a viable industrial energy alternative (which solar and wind are not). As we speak North Dakota and Alberta are being strip mined for low grade tar. So how exactly will taxing that process do anything at all besides enrich a chosen coeterie of scammers (the usual suspects), impoverish those on the lower income scale to whom the costs will be passed, and distort the economy in various large and small unforseen ways. It doesn't matter whether you believe the AGW camp or not, the climate will continue to fluctuate one way or another anyway, and cap and trade just fattens greasy fucks like Albert Gore without affecting the end result at all. Like 2late said above... planning and preparation, resilience, is important; the rest is just gas. BTW, no science is ever settled, it's always hypothesis, read Feinman for christsake, get a clue.
El Niño or La Nada for the 2014/15 ENSO Season
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/15/el-nino-or-la-nada-for-the-201415-...
El Niño and La Niña events are the dominant modes of natural climate variability on Earth, which is why the state of the tropical Pacific is continuously monitored. El Niños and La Niñas impact weather patterns globally. As a number of recent papers have argued, the dominance of La Niña events in recent years is responsible for part of the cessation in global surface warming outside of the Arctic, so by inference, those papers are also stating that a string of strong El Niño events were responsible for part of the long-term warming from the mid-1970s to the turn of the century. There’s nothing new about that; for years we’ve been discussing the naturally occurring, sunlight-fueled processes that drive El Niño events and cause long-term warming of global surface temperatures. If this subject is new to you, see the link at the end of this post for an overview.
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) provides the following summary of their ENSO forecasts in their January 30, 2014 El Niño/La Niña Update: