Skip to comments.
Al Roker Wishes 'Global Warming' Term Had Never Been Used
NewsBusters ^
| February 26, 2015
| P.J. Gladnick
Posted on 02/26/2015 10:54:17 AM PST by PJ-Comix
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
When Mother Nature doesn't cooperate with liberal ideology, then change the terminology.
1
posted on
02/26/2015 10:54:17 AM PST
by
PJ-Comix
To: PJ-Comix
OK, Al, I have a better term for you.
“Scientific fraud.”
Try that one.
2
posted on
02/26/2015 10:55:52 AM PST
by
henkster
(Do I really need a sarcasm tag?)
To: henkster
Gore Bull warming is good for me.
3
posted on
02/26/2015 10:56:33 AM PST
by
mountainlion
(Live well for those that did not make it back.)
To: PJ-Comix
4
posted on
02/26/2015 10:56:38 AM PST
by
cripplecreek
("For by wise guidance you can wage your war")
To: PJ-Comix
Posh! I remember when the key word was THE GREEN HOUSE EFFECT!
To: mountainlion
Roker will say whatever it takes to insure his name remains on the invitation lists for the Chablis and brie fests on Long Island.
6
posted on
02/26/2015 10:58:27 AM PST
by
Don Corleone
("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
To: PJ-Comix
7
posted on
02/26/2015 10:58:27 AM PST
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: Jack Hydrazine
8
posted on
02/26/2015 11:00:01 AM PST
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: PJ-Comix
Awww... poor leftists. It had to be global warming because the whole point was that the theory that CO2 emissions were increasing the mean global temperature was supposed to be the ticket to massive government (or better still UN) intervention in the energy and technology sectors. Blaming any and all changes in climate on CO2 emissions removes even the gleam of scientific respectability from the effort, since there is no plausible causal relationship between elevated CO2 levels and decreases in mean global temperature or more violent weather with steady global temperatures.
9
posted on
02/26/2015 11:01:17 AM PST
by
The_Reader_David
(And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
To: PJ-Comix
10
posted on
02/26/2015 11:01:19 AM PST
by
SWAMPSNIPER
(The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not A Matter of Opinion)
To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Greenhouse Effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
By their percentage contribution to the greenhouse effect on Earth the four major gases are:[21][22]
water vapor, 3670%
carbon dioxide, 926%
methane, 49%
ozone, 37%
The major non-gas contributor to the Earth’s greenhouse effect, clouds, also absorb and emit infrared radiation and thus have an effect on radiative properties of the atmosphere.[22]
11
posted on
02/26/2015 11:01:32 AM PST
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: PJ-Comix
Notice that none of the weathermen are using "polar vortex" this year. Everyone is using the term arctic blast....and going back to ye old "jet stream" pictures.
Now where did everyone think that cold came from??? The equator??
To: PJ-Comix
Algore also had, “Dirty Weather”
13
posted on
02/26/2015 11:01:40 AM PST
by
molson209
(Blank)
To: PJ-Comix
14
posted on
02/26/2015 11:02:12 AM PST
by
Starstruck
(If my reply offends, you probably don't understand sarca only ones we can gesm or criticism...or do.)
To: Jack Hydrazine
Perhaps even Al Roker has noticed that it is cold as hell, so much for “global warming” now its “climate change” or its a lot colder than it was in winters a few years ago. As the communists in Russia used to say, “Forward ... whatever the slogan”.
15
posted on
02/26/2015 11:02:14 AM PST
by
laconic
To: PJ-Comix
I remember after Hurricane Sandy he said “I have two words, ‘Global Warming.’” The fool used them himself.
16
posted on
02/26/2015 11:02:56 AM PST
by
jps098
To: Jack Hydrazine
17
posted on
02/26/2015 11:04:19 AM PST
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Actually, the greenhouse effect is nothing to do with IR absorption. Vertical convection is blocked physically by the glass roof, and that's why greenhouses warm up. (Even climate scientists accept that).
It is worth noting that there is a "greenhouse roof" in the Earth's atmosphere, too -- the lower-stratosphere inversion blocks warm air from escaping and forces it to move away from the equator toward the poles, thereby keeping the mid-latitudes livable.
18
posted on
02/26/2015 11:05:27 AM PST
by
expat2
To: Jack Hydrazine
From the same Wiki entry about the Greenhouse Effect.
In the Solar System, Mars, Venus, and the moon Titan also exhibit greenhouse effects; that on Venus is particularly large, due to its atmosphere, which consists mainly of dense carbon dioxide.[37] Titan has an anti-greenhouse effect, in that its atmosphere absorbs solar radiation but is relatively transparent to infrared radiation. Pluto also exhibits behavior superficially similar to the anti-greenhouse effect.[38][39]
19
posted on
02/26/2015 11:05:46 AM PST
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: PJ-Comix
20
posted on
02/26/2015 11:05:48 AM PST
by
Iron Munro
(Mark Steyn: "fundamentally transformed" is a euphemism for "wrecked beyond repair.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson