Change is what the climate does: Snowjob

Taken verbatim from Steve Goddard. Links added by yours truly.

CO2 makes it too warm for snow
CO2 makes Greenland melt, which causes the Gulf Stream to collapse, which causes heavy snow
CO2 has caused the demise of the ski industry
CO2 caused the heavy snows, because CO2 makes everything more extreme
CO2 caused the lack of snow. It will only get worse
CO2 caused the Arctic to melt, which produces more heavy snow
CO2 causes a lack of snow, because CO2 makes everything more extreme
CO2 causes more snow, because it can’t snow when the weather is too cold
You are an anti-science flat-earther if you don’t believe all of the above.

CO2 is a truly magical gas. Is there anything it can’t do?

It is all so confusing to us laypeople. Glad the experts know what they are talking about.

Here is a compilation of other contradicting statements from the world of climate science on what is likely to happen. What is a layperson to believe? Settled science it ain't. Even the laity can draw that conclusion.

The above list is not meant to be exhaustive and other instances of the weather offering up contradictions to the politically preferred CAGW viewpoint could be presented. To mention just one that occurred in the spring of 2012 you will remember the early blooming cherry blossoms in Washington, D.C. The Huffington Post has blamed this on global warming.

However, in Japan, due to a particularly cold winter their famed cherry blossoms were late bloomers in the spring(2012). Is this the climate change canary for global cooling? HuffPo logic would seem to dictate this conclusion.

The warm 2012 US spring was offered as proof of manmade global warming by the hysterical MSM. Those who endured the Alaskan 2012 winter or the Swedish 2012 summer might beg to differ. Hot here, cold there. A temperature pattern not so rare.

From the ‘Department of It’s all so Confusing’ comes disagreement about whether to eat meat or not. James Hansen says no. Some warmists are naughty.

This just in. Carbon dioxide is allegedly making the Arctic both wetter and drier, and both are bad.

Never has the quotation from Richard Feynman been so appropriate:

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts"

As an intelligent human commenting on CAGW you cannot be unaware of these instances of confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance that Mother Nature offers up for our consideration. To pick one side as correct while ignoring the contradictory observations of others is to engage in willful self delusion. The science is obviously not settled and a debate is raging whether you wish to acknowledge it or not. Shouting that the sky is falling while Mother Nature herself is failing to behave according to the theory of CO2 induced global warming or to obey the predictions of the global climate models defies reason and the scientific method.

There must be another reason for this abominable human behaviour. It wouldn’t have anything to do with this, would it?

From the Club of Rome:

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose."

One invented for the purpose. Does that sum it up?

They are backing the wrong horse. Change is what the climate does. There is nothing going on that hasn’t happened before and the human use of fossil fuels has nothing to do with climate change or severe weather.

When people are confronted with data that contradict the predictions of climate experts they begin to treat it like the caffeine is good/bad for you controversy. It looks to us like the experts do not know what they are talking about and we can safely ignore them.
The sky is not falling and to believe so is to enter the world of Harold Camping which scientists seem ever more prone to do. This does not do their reputations or that of science any good and causes a loss of esteem and an increase in cynicism among laypeople. Science can become a joke and that is dangerous. Scientists should not cry wolf. It is bad enough when reporters and politicians do it.

Joe Romm: "While we can’t avoid serious global warming at this point, we still have time to avoid “Armageddon” — the end times battle for humanity!"

Sounds like Harold Camping to me.

In view of my failure to succumb to the CAGW fear and guilt being peddled by people who ought to know better there will be no worry in my mind over my carbon footprint nor will my actions embrace the green mantra. When people tell me that the science is settled, there is a scientific consensus and the debate is over my skeptical radar goes on full alert and so should yours. To claim that severe weather that we are always experiencing around the world is unprecedented, unequivocal, accelerating and due to the human burning of fossil fuels is to ignore history. Our ancestors recorded instances of ‘bad’ weather (pdf) some more severe than that of modern times at levels of CO2 both lower and higher than what we experience today.

"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.” ~Bertrand Russell