Comments about ‘Storm pumping up Utah's snowpack; January coldest month since 1949’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, Feb. 10 2013 7:36 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

"The earth is full... there is enough and to spare" tells me the planet will be OK.
---

I grow ever so tired of this false doctrine.

God ALWAYS has stipulations to his promises.
It is Obedience.

We will ONLY have "enough and to spare" if we use it wisely, treat it the very best we can, and do everything in our OWN power to preserve and protect her.

If not, the Lord is also on record, and made it perfectly clear he will destroy us.

=============

jsf
Centerville, UT

Do youself a favor.
Turn off the radio, and Google or Wiki the atmospheric compostition of our sister planet Venus.

BTW - CO2 is not a pollutant, it is a greehouse gas.

jsf
Centerville, UT

**'Study says coal burning in Utah kills 202 a year' - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/19/10

**'EPA inventory shows Utah's sources of greenhouse gas' - By Amy Joi O'Donoghue - 02/05/13 - Published by the Deseret News

'WASHINGTON — The nation's power plants continue to be the single largest stationary source of greenhouse gas emissions, according to new information released Tuesday by the Environmental Protection Agency.'

Now with the Kennecott smelter switching to natural gas, where is any other coal fired plant on the wasatch front? Oh my gosh they aren't the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions on the Wasatch Front. Must be the 202 dead each year are over in Colorado and places beyond. And additionally even though CO2 is listed as a greenhouse gas, at ten times the level it is now, it will not hurt you.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

According to the NOAA, "Near-zero and even negative trends are common for intervals of a decade or less in the simulations, due to the model’s internal climate variability. The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate." See "STATE OF THE CLIMATE IN 2008" at the NOAA website.

Now, we have reports from the UK Met Office stating that the climate warming stopped at least 15 years ago. see "Global Climate Warming Stopped 15 Years Ago, UK Met Office Admits" in New American.

So, we have a study that states if warming is stalled by 15 years or more it meets teh 95% CI to prove that the models used for warming are wrong.

Ok alarmists, here is the question. The NOAA stated the conditions that prove the models you are using are wrong. Those conditions have been met. Why do you still trust models that are PROVEN wrong?

Brave Sir Robin
San Diego, CA

@jsf

Where did I say anything about CO2? I said pollution...you know, that nasty brown stuff that smells bad and turns your lungs black. It comes from engine exhaust and burning stuff (like coal).

So again, if we are supposed to be wise stewards of the earth, do you think that polluting the air is part of being a wise steward? This is a yes or no question.

derecha
Central, UT

How can you tap the Yellowstone or Missouri when everybody cries foul about tapping the Colorado River, which we have rights to divert and it runs through our backyard?

worf
Mcallen, TX

Al Gore failed science in high school, and got a "D" in college.

Hmm? Harsh winters two hundred years ago must have been caused by steam engines.

There's a better chance of ants stopping earthquakes, then people changing the weather/climate.

Just a hint--energy from the sun varies.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@lost in DC
["The earth is full... there is enough and to spare" tells me the planet will be OK. ]

That was given long before the earth reached 7 billion people. And now if all of the 7 billion lived like Americans... no we wouldn't have the resources for that. Especially in some parts of the world where they can barely scrape by as it is (particularly when it comes to water resources).

@Redshirt
"The NOAA stated the conditions that prove the models you are using are wrong. Those conditions have been met. Why do you still trust models that are PROVEN wrong?"

Because the 2000s were the warmest decade on record, 2012 was the warmest La Nina year on record, and January 2013 was the warmest January on record in the UAH dataset. I'm not particularly surprised that a 15-year trend is near 0 for a period where year 1 is the strongest El Nino in over half a century and years 11-15 had La Ninas 4 of the 5 years. The models obviously aren't perfect; for instance they severely underestimated Arctic sea ice melt too.

Badger55
Nibley, Ut

All climate change is not a hoax, just the man made variety.

NedGrimley
Brigham City, UT

"The storm chased away an inversion that had been hanging over the Wasatch Front..."

Wait, isn't anyone going to give the Repugs a pass since they obviously arranged for a clean up of the pollution that everyone has been complaining about?

worf
Mcallen, TX

Say it enough times, and people will believe anything---Bill Clinton USA newspaper 1994

Storms have been occurring for thousands of years. It's nothing new, but some will believe we're causing it with our cars, and factories. This is laughable, and crazy.

the truth
Holladay, UT

Man-made climate change IS a hoax.

The proof?

It has been hotter before.

And it has colder before, in this case, 1949. What is the left's explanation for that?

Even science can not say that man has made any more than a few tenths of one degree difference.

Which means nature is the only major factor and only significant factor.

If the left had not interjected themselves into the free market decades ago, we probably would all using nuclear power mad driving hydrogen powered cars by now, and be pollution free,

and complaints about fossil fuels would just be the stuff of story books.

The problem is NOT conservatives or energy/oil companies, or even cars, it is the left interfering in the natural development of technologies out of irrational fears.

And progressives are using climate change solely for the gain of power and money.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "atl134" that is a nice distraction. You still did not address the question.

Since the NOAA stated that if no warming occured for 15 years or more then the models were wrong and met the 95% Confidence Interval. So, eventhough the NOAA has proof that the models are wrong, you still hold to the lie that the models that the climate change alarmists have good models.

According to Phil Jones, leading climate scientist, there had been no statistically significant warming since 1995. Do you know more than the NOAA or Phil Jones?

Again, why do you trust models that are proven wrong?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments