Global Warming Activists Arrive in Nebraska, Begin Shivering

nebraskax-large

There are places you can safely promote global warming. California, Florida or the surface of the sun. But going to pitch Global Warming in Nebraska or North Dakota or the North Pole is just not going to end well.

Lincoln was the latest stop on the 27-state “I Will Act on Climate” bus tour, a series of rallies in support of taking action on climate change. The tour seizes on a statement made by President Barack Obama during his February State of the Union address.

“For the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change. If Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will,” Obama said.

Nothing fascist about that.

Bob Oglesby, climatologist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, told Saturday’s crowd Nebraska is expected to warm by 4 to 10 degrees during the next century.

“We don’t want our children to have to deal with that,” Haar said.

No. Of course not. Just imagine if Nebraska warms by 4 degrees.

Several Nebraska and Iowa cities set new record low temperatures Sunday morning. Lincoln temperatures fell to 47 to tie the 1994 record.

Just imagine. When Algoremageddon finally kicks in and the North Pole goes up in a blaze of smoke spewing polar bears and igloos all over the place… it will be 51 degrees in Lincoln, Nebraska.

Another speaker, Columbus industrialist Tony Raimondo Jr., said as a business person he is frustrated that the business community isn’t open to addressing environmental issues, but he said awareness is growing.

Raimondo is CEO of Behlen Manufacturing Co., which makes solar energy systems that follow the sun to produce more energy.

I think Tony is a bit confused about the difference between business person and crony capitalist.

Many also used the rally as an opportunity to protest the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline opponents wore red and white “Pipeline Fighter” T-shirts.

It’s almost a pity that Global Warming isn’t real. Some people could use a good apocalypsing.

  • tokoloshiman

    Here in vancouver BC , everyone is celebrating the prolonged warm period and the total absence of rain in the month of july, tourism has peaked and benefitted the economy , but oddly at the same time the warming fanatics roundly denounce
    global warming as the biggest evil facing mankind.
    this selective approach allows for the best of both worlds without a hint of
    self examination or concern about the double standard they embrace so warmly.
    The myth of global warming has reached religious proportions here and one is guilty of a sort of” secular blasphemy ” if one dares opposes the worn out old dogma
    that serves so well and requires, or actually rejects totally , the examination of facts and empirical data.
    Blind faith with the warm sun on your face is fine , but enjoying the change , if it is happening( not) and then decrying it at the same time, seems a bit insincere at best and downright hypocritical at worst.

    • DevilsTrumpet

      The Serra Club found the time to blame the recent flooding in Alberta on the people of Calgary because of the oil industry that is the economy there basically saying to them,it’s your own fault.Why bother blaming the flooding on actual facts like too much development too close to the river or rain and an unusually high amount of snow that fell in the mountains that naturally melts in the warmer summer months.Never let facts get in the way when playing the blame-game.

    • spyeatte

      The left is starting to resemble some sci-fi novel of weird blue ice-people.

    • klem

      Thank God I don’t live in BC anymore.

      • UCSPanther

        BC: Canada’s California.

        While not as far left, it still is pretty bad.

        • klem

          Yet I still thinks its right of Quebec.

  • hoistthatrag

    Alternate title: Short Bus Arrives in Nebraska, Riders Shibbering.

    • Stick

      It would seem the bus came with a few window lickers too.

  • Icarus62

    The grim reality of global warming is that we’re already committed to dealing with a planet hotter than human civilisation has ever experienced before. The climate is warming very rapidly and we’re doing precisely the opposite of what would be needed to address the problem – i.e. we’re producing global warming gases faster than ever, instead of reducing our emissions. Even if we reduced our emissions to zero, which is clearly not going to happen, the evidence indicates that it’s already too late to halt global warming – natural positive feedbacks have been triggered which will take the warming out of our hands, and will not stop until the planet is hotter than it has been for many millions of years. Palaeoclimate studies indicate that we are committed to an ice-free planet with global sea level 80 metres higher than today, although this might take a thousand years to play out.

    We’d better be good at adapting to the kind of climate that the dinosaurs lived in, because that’s where we’re heading.

    • spyeatte

      Oh please, enough with the mindless scare mongering.

      • Icarus62

        It’s the mindless people who *aren’t* scared…

        • spyeatte

          Tell you what, I will start worrying when we start to see that trend, and so far it isn’t even close. You are off by an order of magnitude. the most we will get over the next century is about one meter. Enjoy your paranoia.

          • klem

            Self delusion and chronic depression is more like it.

    • rosewater

      ‘although this might take a thousand years to play out.’

      Good, i’ll start worrying in 990 years

      • Icarus62

        80 metres of sea level rise in a thousand years is 8 metres per century, 80cm per decade. An awful lot of infrastructure is going to be written off, and an awful lot of people displaced – many millions. This is a problem for now, not in 990 years.

        • klem

          You understand that oceans have been rising an average of 6mm per year (2 feet per century), for the past 20,000 years, right?

          And now you think the oceans will rise about 2.5 feet per decade. The thing is, there are not consequences to making these kinds of bizarre predictions. So you can say whatever you want and get away with it.

          When it turns out you are wrong, will you have the backbone to openly admit your error, or will you simply ignore it and carry on like you never said it in the first place?

          • Icarus62

            “During the last ice age, sea level fell to more than 120 metres below present day sea level as water was stored in ice sheets in North America (Laurentian, Cordilleran), Greenland, northern Europe (Fennoscandia and the Barents region) and Antarctica. As the ice melted, starting around 20 000 years ago, sea level rose rapidly at average rates of about 10 mm per year (1 m per century), and with peak rates of the order of 40 mm per year (4 m per century), until about 6000 years ago.”

            http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/sl_hist_intro.html#140

            A thousand years *might* be an under-estimate, but the trouble is that there is no analogue in the geological record for such a rapid global warming as we’re seeing now. Remember that the world warmed around 5C in 10,000 years since the last glacial maximum – that’s 0.005C per decade. Current global warming is nearly 0.2C per decade – 40 times faster. If peak sea level rise was 4m per century during the last deglaciation, with a *much* slower global warming, is it really inconceivable for us to see 8m per century due to anthropogenic global warming?

          • truth_seeker_3

            Temperatures have continued to rise during the last 6500 years. They didn’t just “stop” 6000 years ago as your post would have us to believe.

          • Icarus62

            Incorrect. Don’t forget that “It was warmer in the past!” is one of the deniers’ favourite memes… and they’re right, but only that it was warmer than early 20th Century temperature – not warmer than today.

          • truth_seeker_3

            Read my post. I say data indicates a trend of rising temperatures continuing over the last 6500 years. You imply the temperature stopped moving 6000 years ago. I did not say it was warmer then. Check out the data for Grants Pass

            http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k247/dhm1353/Marcott6_zps514231d3.png

          • Icarus62

            What’s so special about Grants Pass?

          • truth_seeker_3

            Oh, nothing special, just typical of the climate we have.

            It undermines some of the things you would have us believe.
            Do you see that “local” temperature max centered around 1000 BC? AGW was non-existent at that time, yet the temperatures indicated exceed what we are experiencing today. Explain that to us.
            Do you see the trend of increasing temperature? Explain that to us within your view of climate change.

          • Icarus62

            “Oh, nothing special, just typical of the climate we have.”

            But it’s not though, that’s the point. Global climate over the last 10,000 years has been as indicated in the Marcott 2013 graph above, i.e. cooling for most of the Holocene. What’s special about the Grants Pass data (assuming it’s legitimate) is that it is *not* typical. Is that why you cited it?

          • truth_seeker_3

            Ahh… Let us allow those who have their thinking caps on decide for themselves. Grants Pass does exist as evidence of climate conditions over a 6500 year period.
            This is contrary to your assertion that “all the evidence” and “everyone knows” is what you say.
            You choose to convey information as propaganda. YOU are the one with an agenda. YOU only spread fear with no solution to speak of.

          • Icarus62

            “YOU only spread fear with no solution to speak of.”

            That’s correct – global warming is something to be feared, and we don’t yet have any solutions. Ignoring the problem isn’t going to help in finding solutions, is it? It is *necessary* for people to appreciate and fear global warming, so that we have the support to find solutions, if any exist.

          • truth_seeker_3

            You operate outside the bounds of logic and rationality. Why should we listen to you?

          • Icarus62

            There is no doubt that we’re heating up the planet very rapidly – this is an observed fact. There is very good reason to think that this will be overwhelmingly harmful to human civilisation. Obviously *some* people may benefit – for example the Sahel is supposed to get greener as atmospheric circulation cells continue to shift polewards and bring it more precipitation – but the losers are predicted to far outnumber the winners. If you have any research to the contrary, I’d love to hear about it.

          • truth_seeker_3

            You fail to show how the climate we are experiencing falls outside of the long term trend of Grants Pass.
            There is doubt for what you conclude and fail to prove.

          • truth_seeker_3

            “If you have any research to the contrary, I’d love to hear about it.”
            Lie.
            Numerous times evidence has been posted which contradicts what you say “everyone knows” and about which there is “no doubt”.
            What is your response to such evidence?
            You ignore it, just as you are with Grants Pass.

          • klem

            I love that graph, the Marcott graph. The one with the gently sloping curve that shows a small uptick at the end. Then for emphasis the little uptick is extrapolated into a wicked vertical SPIKE. Lol!
            It reminds me of my sons last basketball game where he got a couple of baskets in the final few seconds, getting a similar uptick at the end. If I extrapolate like they did in the graph, he should have an additional 14,464 points in the next game. Wow, not bad.

            Don’t you just love climate science?!

          • Icarus62

            The wicked vertical spike is the instrumental data. You did understand this, right?

          • spyeatte

            It has been much warmer in the past. Here is a finding you might have missed:

            NOAA: 2012 Heat Wave explained by natural variability – similar to 1910. 7/25/2013

            NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado, NOAA Climate Prediction
            Center, Camp Springs, MD, University of Colorado, Cooperative Institute for Research
            in Environmental Sciences, Boulder, Colorado.

          • Icarus62

            You understand that there will always be natural variability, right? There will always be cold extremes and hot extremes, it’s just that the probability distribution is shifting upwards. Have a read of Hansen’s ‘New Climate Dice’ paper -

            “We show that during the past several years the global land area covered by summer temperature anomalies exceeding +3σ has averaged about 10%, an increase by more than an order of magnitude compared to the base period. Recent examples of summer temperature anomalies exceeding +3σ include the heat wave and drought in Oklahoma, Texas and Mexico in 2011 and a larger region encompassing much of the Middle East, Western Asia and Eastern Europe, including Moscow, in 2010.”

          • spyeatte

            When climate resides within natural variability, it is wise not to attribute climate change to human activity. Climate is nonlinear, chaotic and as a result, utterly unpredictable.

          • Icarus62

            “Climate is nonlinear, chaotic and as a result, utterly unpredictable.”

            Yet it has been successfully predicted, so your assertion is clearly incorrect even on the most basic of evidence.

          • spyeatte

            In 2001 the IPCC said accurately in their 3rd Assessment Report: “The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future exact climate states is not possible”.
            The current multi-year slowdown in warming (and some cooling) is a big surprise to the AGW crowd and cannot be explained – the only conclusion is their computer models are wrong. Computer models cannot deal with non-linear chaotic systems where many of the variables are not even known, let alone accurately defined.
            Right now the only thing we have is the “Climate Normal, a 30-year average of weather, against which longer-term climate change can be assessed”. The first one covered the period 1901-1930, the second 1931-1960, the third 1961-1990 – we are currently in the fourth.

          • klem

            And don’t forget that between 15,000 and 6,000 years ago sea level rose at an average rate of 10 mm/yr which accounted for 90 m of ocean rise. That’s 1 meter per century for 9000 years. But within those 9000 years are three cooling periods known as the Dryas’s, the last one around 11,000 years ago was so cold glaciers all over the world began to grow again for about 1000 years. That means that the average ocean rise of 1 meter per century is actually on the low side.

            So is it really inconceivable for us to see 8m per century due to global warming? Absolutely not.
            But is it really inconceivable for us to see 8m per century due to anthropogenic global warming? Not a chance in hell.

            Check out this graph https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Sea_Level.png
            cheers

  • Tom Servo

    Icarus, everything you just wrote is a total fantasy, not a bit of which has a chance of coming true. 80 meters sea level rise? Oh puh-lease, in 100 years worst case is maybe 80 MILLI-meters. Your belief is so 2007!

    The world is going to be cooling for the next 30 – 60 years, look up some of the solar studies being done now. You do know that the world hasn’t warmed one bit in the last 15 years, don’t you, even by your sides own measurements? That’s why the big boys changed the scare name to “climate change”, because the “global warming” meme has already died. Too bad you don’t keep up with the buzzwords, like I said you got stuck in 2007. Old news, buddy, old news.

    Although I am rather heartened by the fact that hard core warmistas like yourself appear to have given up on the idea of doing anything about the made up problem you believe is happening. That’s ok with me, believe whatever you want if it makes you feel good.

    Btw, I’m in Texas and we have just had the coolest July that any of us can remember here. It’s been nice!

    • Icarus62

      Don’t let the facts get in the way of the global warming denial scam, Tom.

      • Sussex Girl

        Um, you are aware that NASA has been monkeying with the data for years, specifically by lowering the temperature records for the 1930s to make today’s temperatures seem higher, and you are aware that temperature stations around the country have had to be relocated because they were in inappropriate places like next to parking lots, and you are aware that European glaciers have been receding since the 1800s because that was when the planet was finally warming after the Little Ice Age, and you are aware that the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than it is today, and you are aware that twice now emails have been leaked that document a clear and disturbing pattern of collusion by the warming camp to suppress information and keep papers by skeptics out of technical journals, that Kevin Trenbreth actually admitted “We can’t account for the lack of warming, and it’s a travesty that we can’t,” right?

        Global temperatures have not warmed in 15 years, since 1998, yet CO2 has continued on its upward trajectory. Many scientists (US, Russian, Danish, and more) are watching the Sun and are calling for a Maunder Minimum. For 400 years, starting with Galileo, astronomers have watched the sunspots as they form and disappear on the Sun’s surface. During the coldest periods (the Maunder Minimum 1640-1680, the Dalton Minimum 1790-1830, a smaller minimum from 1880-1915, and a very little one from 1945-1977), there were few to no sunspots. We are in Sunspot Cycle 24. Originally, during Cycle 23, observers thought 24 was going to mimic Cycle 4, which occurred during the Dalton Minimum. However, two years ago, the National Solar Observatory published three separate reports stating that the sunspots are going to hit a low and may disappear altogether.

        We could get into a whole discussion of the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and the PDO (the Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and how they affect temperature, but enough is enough. CO2 does not drive temperature (some indications are that temperature drives rising CO2 levels with an 800 year lapse). After several years of very changeable weather, the planet’s going to slide into a very cold period. One Russian paper calls for a minimum starting in 2020 and lasting until at least 2040. Better get your long johns ready.

        • Icarus62

          OK, so you’re making two contradictory claims in the same comment:

          1: It’s warming, but it’s natural;
          2: It’s not warming.

          Which would you like to support and which will you abandon?

          • gotroy22

            When will you anti-science global warmists give it a rest?

          • klem

            Shhhhh, they don’t know they’re anti-science, don’t tell them. Shhhhh….

          • Sussex Girl

            Sigh. I’ll try to explain this in very simple terms since you seem to need information presented that way.

            1. I clearly said it’s NOT warming any more, not since 1998. And yes, global warming is caused by natural cycles.

            2. It’s not warming anymore, not since 1998. The cycles are natural phenomena.

            Do you get it now?

          • Icarus62

            You’re seriously confused.

            1: Global warming continues unabated as shown by *all* climate metrics.

            2: All of the global warming of the last half century is anthropogenic, and human activity is now the dominant influence on global climate.

            Do you get it now?

          • klem

            Um, I don’t think Icarus62 gets it yet.

          • Otter

            I’m fairly certain he’ll figure it out, about 30 years into the cooling cycle.

  • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

    4 to 10 degrees? Speaking of degrees, where did this goof get his? Nobody, and I mean NOBODY who relies on, um, numbers still claims even a 4C increase. Not the lowest lying liars of the Warmist movement like Mann or Hansen can back that up. Don’t they have papers, phones or computers in Nebraska?

    • Icarus62

      We’re still on course for 2C by 2050, 4C or more by 2100.

      • klem

        Terrific graph.

        Um, what satellites were they using to record global temperatures back in 1950?

        Just kind of wondering….

  • Tom Servo

    All this scare-mongering about the END OF THE WORLD IN FIRE!!! is just the same old Hellfire and Brimstone routine that old time country preachers would use to scare a few more bucks out of the flock. REPENT, REPENT, for YE ARE EVIL AND WICKED AND DOETH LOTS OF NAUGHTINESS ON THIS EARTH!!!

    Fire always seems to be real popular with these types, whether a thousand years ago or today. Oh, and the answer is ALWAYS “Give ALL your MONEY to the HIGH PRIEST, (namely the guy who is doing the scaring) And I will intervene with God (Or Gaia, as the case may be) for you and you will be saved! But if ye do not repent, FIRE, FIRE, FLOOD and FIRE! Or maybe drought. But it will definitely be unpleasant!!!!”

    • klem

      This is exactly why we refer to climate alarmism as a religion. Same people, different god.

  • Will

    I’m a republican, but let’s all stop with this global warming denial nonsense. Even if the data is exaggerated, the earth is clearly warming and we can all agree that conserving the earth is a good thing. Let’s just all make easy choices too lower energy usage. Buy fuel efficient American made cars to help the economy and the environment, and to not help the Middle East.

    • klem

      Hmm, thee is a form of Republican with which I am unfamiliar.

    • Gunrunner1

      He is a computer generated model

  • klem

    ““For the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change.”

    These kinds of comments make me laugh. These are the same fanatics who go around saying that there are too many people in the world,and we need to reduce the human population. But when the subject of climate change comes up, suddenly they are all worried about the children.

    “But what about the children!! save the children!!” Lol!

    The hypocrisy is truly astonishing.

    How do these people get along each day?

  • zlop

    Stop the nonsense, Right Now !
    Interfering with H2O — additional Greenhouse Gases Cool !

  • JRiverMartin

    “It’s almost a pity that Global Warming isn’t real. Some people could use a good apocalypsing.”

    Umm. You don’t like science, do you? Clearly you’re basing your climate science opinion on … reading tea leaves? Astrology? Smoke and mirrors? What?