published Tuesday, December 28th, 2010

Christmas Blizzard

Follow Clay Bennett on Facebook

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

31
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
AndrewLohr said...

Ha Ha Ha :)

December 28, 2010 at 12:05 a.m.
EaTn said...

Most think that whatever weather change we're experiencing locally reflects the weather global change, either hotter or colder. It's a little more complicated since the northern and southern hemisphere daylight cycles along with jet streams are a weather factor along with the ice masses at each pole, which is a true global change indicator, and both poles are definitely melting at a rapid rate.

December 28, 2010 at 6:21 a.m.
woody said...

There's no business like snow business...

Don't eat it if it's yellow, Woody

December 28, 2010 at 6:24 a.m.
EaTn said...

I think folklore is about as good a weather forecaster as any. There weren't many wooly worms around this year but I did find one in my woodpile with a black head and redish body, which indicates cold early and milder in late winter. We'll see if that sucker was lying.

December 28, 2010 at 7:04 a.m.
delmar said...

Out of all those snow flakes, you mean to tell me that no 2 are alike? I love Mother Nature and all her debilitating beauty.

December 28, 2010 at 8:16 a.m.
woody said...

EaTn..you're a hoot. Quite correct in your equating folklore with modern forecasters..but a hoot nonetheless.

However, the day I make a concerted effort to gauge the amount of 'wool' on a worm or worry about whether or not an over-sized rodent sees its own shadow will be the day I begin to look for bears gently rolling themselves into one large ball in order to kiss their own behinds goodbye as a sure sign of the beginning of tornado season.

With tongue firmly planted in cheek (which must surely be a sign of something besides impending insanity), Woody

December 28, 2010 at 9:02 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Unfortunately, extreme weather events are a classic sign of man-made global warming and only reinforce a climate change on our little blue planet. Approximately, 18 countries broke their records for their hottest day ever this year, and, now, it’s harsher winters. . . but this will not last forever:

“As climate change appears to trigger harsher winter events in parts of the world, that's not an effect that will last forever. As the world warms, even cold air from the Arctic or Siberia may not be enough to offset the greenhouse effect, and major snowstorms like the one the Northeast just experienced could be a thing of the past. That might make for less snow shoveling — but on the whole, it won't be a very pleasant planet to live on.”

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2039777,00.html?xid=rss-mostpopular [The Northeast Blizzard: One More Sign of Global Warming - Bryan Walsh]

December 28, 2010 at 9:23 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Delmar wrote: "Out of all those snow flakes, you mean to tell me that no 2 are alike? I love Mother Nature and all her debilitating beauty."

I know something about snowflakes. I grew up in Buffalo, New York. Even if it's true that no two flakes are alike, how do they know? How would anyone go about proving that?

Fun weather observation: the Eagles / Vikings game was cancelled due to snow. Now the outdoor hockey game scheduled for Pittsburgh New Year's Day might also be cancelled.

Not because of snow. It might be too warm and ice doesn't like 43 degrees.

What climate change?

December 28, 2010 at 9:27 a.m.
hambone said...

I can live with climate change.

Central heat and air, helps!

December 28, 2010 at 11:11 a.m.
acerigger said...

Off topic,but, congratulations Clay for receiving the U.N. Cartoonist award! {I still think it shoulda made the front page on-line}

December 28, 2010 at 12:03 p.m.
Marylutn said...

Am I the only person to believe that in all of history of snowfall their ARE possibly AT LEAST 2 snowflakes that are the same? I mean, come on....

December 28, 2010 at 12:08 p.m.
OllieH said...

acerigger- I read about Clay's latest award, too. Only two Americans were among the thirteen cartoonists who were recognized by the U.N.! Here's the link to the story in this morning's Times Free Press-

Kudos to Clay for this well-deserved recognition, and congratulations to Chattanooga for having such a talented cartoonist.

December 28, 2010 at 12:40 p.m.
jayhay182 said...

Bah Humbug to a white Christmas.

December 28, 2010 at 1:19 p.m.

For those keeping the correct score, it's the woolly bear caterpillar and it's as good at predicting and modeling the weather as the government teat sucking and rent seeking scientists and their lacky algore.

I guess Bennett is also up for the Chicken Little Award?

December 28, 2010 at 3:20 p.m.
acerigger said...

Bookie, may you R.I.P.

December 28, 2010 at 3:59 p.m.
miraweb said...

Congratulations, Clay. Another well-deserved honor!

Now - off to shovel some more . . .

December 28, 2010 at 4:39 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

"both poles are definitely melting at a rapid rate."

Really? Not.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg


"Unfortunately, extreme weather events are a classic sign of man-made global warming and only reinforce a climate change on our little blue planet."

LOL. That may be the stupidest thing you've ever posted, and there have been quite a few doozies.

Are you under the impression that extreme weather has only existed in the last century or so, or are you ignoring the fact that the REPORTING of "extreme" weather events has increased due to greater communications technology?

As for Time magazine...

"Telltale signs are everywhere —from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other convincing data." http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html

Up and down, up and down. The climate is cyclical and under the very real influence of the sun and the slow meanderings of our orbit around the it. CO2 is a bit player.

We are lucky to be living in a warm epoch.

During the cold times, our friends in places like Chicago, New York City, and points north would be crushed under 10,000+ feet of ice.

If you are really interested in climate, and not just the global wealth redistribution solution looking for a problem to "fix", I'd suggest you check out the excellent work by the folks who aren't ignoring that big ball of hydrogen in the sky which supplies 99.99999% of all the energy in the solar system.

Also, you might want to look into which is the more powerful "greenhouse" gas, water vapor or CO2. Check out the energy absorption cross-section of each, and then check out the relative abundance of each in the atmosphere, and then really think about how much energy the CO2 could possibly redirect after the H2O has had it's fun.

In short, there is NO empirical evidence to support the "CO2 causes global warming/climate change/extreme weather" theory.

Didja ever wonder why they keep changing the name?

December 28, 2010 at 6:46 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

Hambone wrote,

"I can live with climate change. Central heat and air, helps!"

Yeah, until your power bill "necessarily skyrockets", as our idiot in chief has claimed it must to combat GW/CC/EW.

"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," Obama told the Chronicle . "Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."

Cap and trade has no purpose other than to "fight" GW/CC/EW and to enrichen those few who are duping the masses.

What happened to the Chicago Climate Exchange? TITS-UP LOL I hope they all took a bath.

December 28, 2010 at 6:57 p.m.

SCOTTY, nice try but the bed wetters don't bother themselves with facts. As you said, they are going to simply "fall-in-line" with whatever is being pushed by the socialists seeking wealth redistribution in the name of fairness.

December 28, 2010 at 7:04 p.m.
Clara said...

What in the world is GW/CC/EW? I can't even guess!

December 28, 2010 at 7:29 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

btg,

It takes a very special kind of ignorance to believe that adding CO2 to the atmosphere causes both hotter weather and colder weather, more droughts and more floods, shrinking glaciers and larger icebergs.

If all weather anomalies support the theory, it is not a falsifiable theory, therefore, it isn't science, it is religion.

Give it a few more years, they'll be wailing about a new ice age again, and AGW will be forgotten for 30 years until the cycle switches back the other direction again.


The cartoon seems to be poking fun at the AGW edifice as well, but who knows the mind of Clay?


As for the "hottest decade" or "hottest year" B.S., well yeah, that's what happens when the liars keeping the records keep adjusting the past records down, tossing the cooler readings from recent years, and "homogenizing" the remainders to fit better with the readings from airport sensors.

Check into it, you'll be disgusted by the disregard for proper archiving and analysis.

The climategate e-mails, along with 15 years of no statistically significant warming killed AGW dead, it's coasting on inertia and the desperate push of true believers now, but the game is up.

December 28, 2010 at 7:43 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

Clara,

Global Warming/Climate Change/Extreme Weather

They keep changing the name when things don't work out as predicted.

Climate Disruption was bandied about for a bit but never really stuck. To hard for "journalists" to spell, I guess.

December 28, 2010 at 7:46 p.m.
BobMKE said...

Does anyone know if Al Gore Kool-Aid tastes any good heated up?

December 28, 2010 at 7:55 p.m.
hambone said...

SCOTTYM, If one doesn't beleive there's such a thing as climate change, does that mean that the exhausts from coalfired power houses are good for ones health?

Should the filters and scrubbers on those plants be done away with to reduce the cost of electricity?

December 28, 2010 at 8:07 p.m.
fairmon said...

Emissions and pollution are bad. We may be killing each other and making many ill with pollution and emissions. However, to think mankind has or will ever determine if and when weather changes occur is gullible and naive. Throughout history man has dreamed of being able to have an affect on weather while others have scammed the public by claiming the ability to cause or understand weather change. In many ways the scamming is still happening, isn't that right former V.P. Gore.

December 28, 2010 at 9:24 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

"If one doesn't beleive there's such a thing as climate change, does that mean that the exhausts from coalfired power houses are good for ones health?"

Nice try.

No one is claiming that climate does not change.

On the contrary, my understanding is that the Earth's climate has been changing in one way or another for about 4.5 billion years. Our piddling bit of historical records are not even close to robust enough to inform a decent guess about what all of the factors are which contribute to climate change, nor what the upper and lower bounds of average global temperature actually look like on the ground in various locations.

It would be the AGW cultist who claim to know how all of the various forcings work well enough to discern that a small change (~0.7C) in the very poor, and very short temperature records was caused by a trace atmospheric component, of which the human release portion is a very small portion of the total flux.

This is hubris. Big time hubris.

The rest of us who are even a little informed know that the Earth's climate has been cycling between warm episodes (approximately as warm as now), and cold episodes (glaciation down to 40degrees lat.) for at least the last 650,000 years, and likely the last 10 million years.

There weren't any coalfired power plants back then.

I'm not convinced that our 30+ years of good satellite data and 130+ years of poor thermometer records even expose a sliver of the true range of our climate. The proxies go back a good bit further, but they generally disagree with the "stable climate" model that is needed to deduce a change from anthropogenic CO2.

And I'm darned positive that anyone who claims that any climatic warming(or change or extreme weather event) we may take note of is caused by human released CO2, because they don't know of any other cause that would make sense, and plus 'cause they said so, is a fraud, a charlatan or a fool but most assuredly they are NOT a scientist.

The CO2 being released from those coalfired plants is CO2 that was captured by living plants, long ago, directly from from the air. It isn't anymore of a threat to this planet, or us, than H2O.


"Should the filters and scrubbers on those plants be done away with to reduce the cost of electricity?"

Filters and scrubbers remove harmful particulates and poisonous gases. CO2 is neither.

It's plant food.

But hey, you got a strawman twofer.

December 28, 2010 at 10:40 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

"...isn't that right former V.P. Gore"

Hey, if you have him nearby, can you ask him what happened to that "hockystick" graph he was riding up in his movie.(LOL, snicker, snicker) Also ask him about the hurricanes, I'm sure he said something about them getting stronger and more frequent as the CO2 concentration increased. What happened?

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/hurricanes/fig1-atlantic-all-and-major.gif (NOAA hasn't updated this graph to show the 9 hurricanes in 2009, or the 12 hurricanes in 2010. I guess it isn't a priority as it doesn't support the cause.)

If one considers how many hurricanes may have formed up and then dissipated, with out being noticed, before we acquired the technology to look down upon the Earth from on high, there is NO trend.

Al, you've got some e'splaining to do.

December 28, 2010 at 10:59 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...
<p>www.jerrypournelle.com includes some discussion of global warming, among other topics. Dr Pournelle sounds moderately and intelligently skeptical: How good are the measurements (paint on the case around the equipment can affect readings)? How do we average 1500 readings into one global reading? 1500 readings would each have to cover an area over 100x100 miles, right?

He included a link to a harderline skeptical site that claimed Artic ice melt is from a couple big undersea volcanoes acting up up there. FWIW.

He compared the global warming battle to the Velikovsky battle. Mainstream science in A.D. 1950 got nastily defensive when Velikovsky claimed catastrophes happen; and however worthless V's particular theories of catastrophe were, he turned out to have the right kind of theory, a theory that catastrophes do happen. Now some global warmers are getting nastily defensive. Nice to see Clay willing to laugh a little; and congrats on the UN cartoonist award.

December 29, 2010 at 12:42 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.