In law enforcement, the police know that the likelihood of a suspect being guilty rises each time the suspect changes his or her story. Enter global warming peddling Democrats.

In just the previous couple of years, as evidenced in the video below and by RFK, Jr. as well, Democrat after Democrat has cited low snow levels of evidence of global warming. Now they tell us that record cold and snowfalls are the evidence of global warming (implied message: “Go run that gas-powered leaf blower and save the polar icecaps!”).

Here’s a parade of Democrats who were against “global warming causes more snow” before they were for it:

Even “Bill Nye the Junk Science Guy” is on the “global warming is causing these blizzards” bandwagon. Bill said that if you don’t agree with Al Gore, not only are you wrong, but you’re unpatriotic.

The “global warming” argument has devolved into a paradox — self-contradictory scam artists and unwitting dupes they’ve brought on board posing as patriots and saviors of a fragile world, and the only thing they need to save you from yourself is your money. This is why they’re called “green jobs.” Given the amount of BS that’s being shoveled, they should be called “brown jobs.”

It’s actually hard to believe that they’re still trying to sell this tripe. It’s like watching a perpetual loop of Death of a Salesman with Al Gore playing the part of Willy Loman.


3 Responses to “Democrats Were Against ‘Global Warming Causes More Snow’ Before They Were For It”

  1. keyboard jockey on February 13th, 2010 2:01 pm

    They should be called PINK JOBS because it's the Leftest Green Movement pushing this SCAM. Cap and Trade – Copenhagen Summit – the first world has to funnel money to 3rd world countries with corrupt governments. This is all about Wealth Distribution and that's Socialist – PINK.

    Vann Jones was the GREEN JOBS CZAR, self described Communist….hmmmm hmmmm hmmmm Barack Hussein Obama.

    Who is RFK Jr's very best-est friend "Hugo Chavez" Socialist.

  2. shamgar50 on February 26th, 2010 1:35 am

    That's the problem in debating warming with ignorant deniers. You don't understand the science. Warming can cause extremes, and it's even possible it could trigger an ice age. Depends on the exact forces at work, and how certain events play out.

  3. Annie J on March 3rd, 2010 9:49 am

    Politicians' and Bill Nye's arguments do not constitute the majority scientific opinion. Climate scientists say you cannot attribute any one, or a few, specific WEATHER events definitively to climate change. To see if climate change is happening, only long term trends will give you an answer. You have to measure things like average temperature, rainfall or snowfall, etc. over decades or longer to see a trend.

    In other words, you cannot say that lots of snow one year, or even a dry spell over five years, either proves or disproves climate change. You have to look at longer term trends.

    The problem is that many people latch onto specific weather events, or short-tern weather trends, to support their arguments. People who don't think climate change is happening do this, as well as people who think it is. On both sides, the reasoning is faulty.

    Unfortunately the public (like you), who are largely not educated in climate science, conflate any statements that politicians who believe that climate change is happening make, with the science. You have to realize, politicians do not necessarily represent the science.

    I personally am not clear on the science about whether climate change is projected to lead to more snow. What scientists HAVE overwhelmingly projected is that climate change will lead to warmer AVERAGE temperatures, as well as more precipitation in CERTAIN AREAS of the world. That could either mean more or less snow, and it could vary by locations.

    Scientific models have also projected that climate change would lead to more HEAVY snowfalls and rains, and fewer light snowfalls and rains.

    Climate science says climate change IS expected to lead to more frequent extreme weather events, like this year's heavy storms. But again, you cannot pin specific weather events to climate change – you have to measure whether they do increase over time.

    Your other fallacy is to say that someone changing what they say discredits them. That's COMPLETELY wrong and such bad logic. Science is not criminology. In science, new information is constantly being discovered through research, which may shift scientists' views on things. Many details of what climate change will do are still being worked out – like what exactly will happen to precipitation in local regions, for example. However, a lot is already definitively known – like, climate change is happening, average temperatures are going up, and the cause is primarily human-caused greenhouse gases. Just because scientists don't know the details does not mean they don't know the big picture.

    Again, politicians on both sides are not scientists. So don't take their word for the truth or to disprove climate change.,8599,19… (scroll down past the map)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.