Seoul buried in heaviest snowfall in 70 years

Isn't global warming wonderful!

Isn't global warming wonderful!

Yes. Yes it is!

Isn't global warming wonderful!

Assuming that was a poor attempt at sarcasm, global warming DOES NOT EQUATE TO hot temperatures. Why is it that as soon there's any reports of cold weather, the ignorant right-wingers come out with the 'global warming' taunt.

A bit of reading would educate you, to the extent that global warming is about weather extremes / unpredictable weather conditions. Those ice-caps aren't melting due to a lack of global warming.

Isn't climate change wonderful!

Mars and Venus have been going through climate change too, according to the latest studies.

chotto, the whole premise when Al Gore started his "Global Warming" was that the temperatures were rising causing the ice at the poles and other glaciers to melt. Increased warming would also lead to greater hurricanes and other major storms due to the fact that those storms gain strength when they are over warm waters, and thus if the earth's temperature were to increase and the ocean waters increased, then the storms would get stronger.

It has only been recently, when events such as a below normal activity hurricane season in the Atlantic than predicted, and the unseasonably cold weather that has been reported in places that now the Global Warming alarmist have tried to shift the argument to "climate change" due to global warming. So now, since it is getting colder, the ice caps are melting. Does that mean the "cold" temperatures are leaving the poles becuase it is getting "too warm" there like the polar bears and coming to lower lattitudes to set up home?

global warming DOES NOT EQUATE TO hot temperatures

so warming does not equate to hot so I guess the next time I run a stop sign I can tell the officer that stop does not equate to halt.

How about this, cutting down on putting less pollutants in the air and water and doing a better job at conservation efforts. But buying and selling of "carbon credits" will not solve anything.

so warming does not equate to hot so I guess the next time I run a stop sign I can tell the officer that stop does not equate to halt.

Sigh. That's not what I mean. "Global warmiing" is a term used incorrectly, THUS, certain idiots cannot distinguish between global warming and climate change.

Please excuse my use of the word "design" here (I am in no way a creationist) but the earth is not designed to withstand these levels of pollution for a sustained period of time. FACT.

Or alternatively, we can bury our heads in the sand and pretend the problem doesn't exist.

Please excuse my use of the word "design" here (I am in no way a creationist) but the earth is not designed to withstand these levels of pollution for a sustained period of time. FACT.

Wow, and where do your facts come from. By all means, please enlighten us with your baseless and unproven facts! Hey, I have one. Anyone who buys into the global warming hysteria, is an idiot. FACT

I think my fact is a little easier proven then yours.

chotto, the whole premise when Al Gore started his "Global Warming" was that the temperatures were rising causing the ice at the poles and other glaciers to melt. Increased warming would also lead to greater hurricanes and other major storms due to the fact that those storms gain strength when they are over warm waters, and thus if the earth's temperature were to increase and the ocean waters increased, then the storms would get stronger.

Actually, this was added to the argument later. The hysterics needed more things they could point to, in order to say, look, thats caused by global warming! See that hurricane, pay no attention to the science behind hurricane formation or anything like that. Its all caused by Global Warming. Heavy Rainfall, No Rainfall, High Temps, Low Temps, even average temps, everythings caused by global warming now. And if it isn't yet, someone think up a way to link it.

Gee. I wonder if it is as cold in Pyongyang? Colder, I bet. I don't think missiles fit well in a wood stove. Do they have lumps of coal to boil their gruel?

So where is the snow in Japan? No headlines. Bummer.

A bit of reading would educate you...

THAT's where you lost 'em. Believe me.

Peace,

Taka

Sigh. That's not what I mean. "Global warmiing" is a term used incorrectly, THUS, certain idiots cannot distinguish between global warming and climate change.

chotto, so in your opinion, Gore would be one of those idots since he made a movie about Global Warming, and there were a lot of idiots in Copenhagen a few months ago since they were there for the "Global Warming" conference.

Or alternatively, we can bury our heads in the sand and pretend the problem doesn't exist.

No, I don't think my suggestions of finding better ways to recycle and conserve resources not go around telling people you need to pay a tax in order to stifle productivity to pay for some arbitrary person supposedly planting a tree in your name.

So tell me chotto, since you are not a creationist (and I want an answer strictly on scientific terms, even though I do believe in God but I am not afraid of scientific facts) how did the earth manage to go in and out of periods of global cooling through various ice ages without the assistance of humans buring greenhouse gases? Also, since scientist have determined that places like the Sahara were once green and verdant before they became arid, how did it manage to change, and not all of the polar bears die off (nor did the other artic creatures)? Please tell me since I am just some "idot" that doesn't understand high science.

I hope Kimpo Airport is cleared in time for my flight to arrive!

Anyone who buys into the global warming hysteria, is an idiot. FACT

Awww bless you Molenir, for trying to hard to be intelligent. Considering your reply made next-to-no sense, let's try again, shall we?

Regardless of whether or not global warming even exists, we are emitting far too much CO2 into the atmosphere, among other pollutants. A lot of the entrenched right-wing numbskull opposition to climate change science (from people such as yourself) is purely reactionary: if the left believes it to be true, then it must be opposed as a matter of principle. You're probably kidding yourself if you think you're going to find a rationale any more sophisticated than that.

All climate change skeptics can do is brainwash gullible, ignorant people who wouldn't understand the scietific method if they were mugged by it on a crowded street (i.e. right-wing politicians) and hope they can create an illusion of doubt and debate within the scientific community for long enough to ensure that their economic interests are not threatened by these pesky, do-gooder environmentalists. It's pathetic, and I can only be thankful that the groundswell of public opinion is raidly shifting against them.

I am not worried about CO2 emissions as much as I am worried about toxics, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, etc. being released into the environment; environmental degredation and destruction of natural habitat, destruction of CO2 sinks (rainforests), overfishing, heavy burden on soil, human population explosion and subsequent rising need for more resources, land, environment to exploit.

This is an issue with real-life consequences, the evidence supporting it is completely unambiguous and universally accepted by literally every credible scientific organisation. Considering how difficult scientific consensus is to build on any issue, let alone one this complex, such a consensus is telling in ways that perhaps people indifferent to the scientific process may not understand. If you wanna challenge it, good luck, If you believe the worldwide science comunity on global warming are liars, then:

1) Write up a paper indicating your thesis and detail the evidence supporting it. 2) Submit that paper to a journal of scientific review, where - if the science passes muster - it will be published. 3) Hope that your thesis is able to undermine the scientific consensus on the issue.

I look forward to reading your scientific analysis.

By all means, please enlighten us with your baseless and unproven facts!

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2009/11/blame_it_on_the_satellite

Alphaape: " Does that mean the "cold" temperatures are leaving the poles becuase it is getting "too warm" there like the polar bears and coming to lower lattitudes to set up home?"

Where are the polar ice caps in Seoul? Isn't this massive snowfall in Seoul more or less what the thread is about? If you want to go off topic and rant about how climate change can't be occurring because it was previously hyped as 'global warming' and can't quite figure out how general warming can lead to freakish weather, well... It's entertaining, to watch the denial, though.

Chotto: Don't ask people like Molenir to give you facts to back up their statements on this issue... they simply cannot, and when you do give facts, they will simply deny them.

Moliner: "I think my fact is a little easier proven then yours."

You'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath while you search the right-winger blogs for 'proof' (ie. not opinion).

I want to make a snowman...

cal1c0cat: "So where is the snow in Japan? No headlines. Bummer."

Well, until mid-November even the best ski places in Japan were reporting very poor conditions (for skiing... ie. no natural snow), but then it became BITTER cold; much colder than normal, with much of Japan getting heavier snow than usual in December, if you recall.

The thing is these countries, aside from northern areas, can't deal with it as it is abnormal. Snow tires are a recent thing in Japan, and they still have the plastic chains they pull out to drive in such conditions. Taxi and bus drivers in South Korea are AWFUL to begin with... I can't even imagine how many accidents resulted from driving in these conditions.

Where is Al Gore when we need him?

Please tell me since I am just some "idot" that doesn't understand high science.

Well, you labelled yourself as such, so I won't bother. I believe in God, but a firm believer in sceince and evolution etc.

smithinjapan, my comments in regards to global warming were in response to chotto's comments about how people like me (as he labled the so called idots) don't understand it is not just about global warming but climate change (or whatever song and dance they are peddeling now).

chotto, you still didn't answer my question. Just becuase someone does not agree with your beliefs they're an idot. Real high class argument you are presenting. There are probably just as many people on the left side of the political spectrum who don't believe in all of the "hokum" that the warming alarmist are selling. You gave a discourse on how to conduct the scientific method, but still didn't answer the questions I asked. Also, believe it or not, not all scientist are in agreement as evidenced by the emails from the "climate gate." Yes the methods of getting those emails was wrong, but I don't seem to recall the Univ. saying that they were fabricated, just "misunderstood" by us "unwashed masses" who don't quite understand.

chotto, you still didn't answer my question. Just becuase someone does not agree with your beliefs they're an idot. Real high class argument you are presenting

I also believe smoking can cause cancer. That is my belief. Again, in this case, if you don't agree with my belief, you are an idiot.

I also believe smoking can cause cancer. That is my belief. Again, in this case, if you don't agree with my belief, you are an idiot.

chotto, looking at the evidence that has been presented on smoking and cancer, one can draw a parallel that smoking causes cancer (there is questionable data on seconhand smoke, but that is another story). However, no clear scientific evidence suggest the same for Global Warming (or as you enlightened ones call it climate change). So once again, you are using an old tactic of bait and switch, just like Al Gore. You saw it is Global Warming's fault, and that should be enough. Well, I am going to say that is not enough. Show me the proof of your evidence, not some flippant remarks at trying to be funny or name calling.

Show me the proof of your evidence, not some flippant remarks at trying to be funny or name calling.

I did. See my post / link above. Did you even bother to read it?

I believe in God, but a firm believer in sceince and evolution etc.

God created what and evolution fits in where? If god is real, why does he let all this snow fall? It hurts people and makes their life difficult.

Korean houses have nice 'ondol' under-floor heating systems.

Japanese houses tend to be cool(er) in the summer, but horrible in the winter. Brrr....

I like snow

I am kind of wondering what is doing this. Sure there are cold and warm years. Summer seemed pretty clear this year, but not particularly hot.

I think forest fires, volcanic activity, and particulates are cooling things down. That effect will be gone in a year or two, and we will be back to the trendline, which is generally warmer temperatures and messed up climate.

You see the same kind of thing if you pay attention to any noisy series. This is Fourier stuff. You have different cycles and influences that affect some series. It is not always regular, but dominant trends will prevail as the stronger components move the series. If global temperatures are a stock market, then greenhouse gases are the interest rate trend. You might make a few good trades fighting the trend, but if you bet enough times against it, you will lose big time.

That is why the nattering of the climate-change deniers is so hollow. They do not have a really good idea of what is going on, but they want to brag that they were right about the weather today, or this week. It is like a college kid making 700 bucks in the market. In the long haul, the kid will lose it all back because he is "learning" from luck, not from knowledge or diligence. In the long run, the deniers will be wrong because they just don't know what they are talking about and they are not trying to improve their knowledge.

Let's enjoy the cool weather everyone. It ain't gonna last.

However, no clear scientific evidence suggest the same for Global Warming (or as you enlightened ones call it climate change).

Not only is that incorrect, it doesn't even pass the giggle test.

Do you mean to tell me that cutting down all the rainforests and replacing them with parking lots isn't changing the albedo of the earth? Are you really that ill informed? Books are your friend, Alpha.

Taka

Taka313, do you mean to tell us that humans are causing the Earth to get significantly warmer? And that we can stop it or reverse it? I can tell you the Koreans don't want the Earth any cooler than it is.

That is why the nattering of the climate-change deniers is so hollow. They do not have a really good idea of what is going on, but they want to

brag that they were right about the weather today, or this week. It is like a college kid making 700 bucks in the market. In the long haul, the kid will lose it all back because he is "learning" from luck, not from knowledge or diligence. In the long run, the deniers will be wrong because they just don't know what they are talking about and they are not trying to improve their knowledge.

I guess you could say the same for those who believe in the whole global warming issue also. Did not the earth go through warming and cooling periods without the help of man? So I guess it is fair to say that both sides of the issue may be missing the mark.

that's true Smith but I would really like to see Tokyo shut down. That hasn't happened in a few years.

"So I guess it is fair to say that both sides of the issue may be missing the mark."

But you cannot see the difference, can you? The people who are studying anthropogenic climate change are carefully assessing and quantifying the effects of greenhouse gases on climate. The deniers are just shrugging.

You are probably the kind of person who believes that a creation myth is a valid theory to explain life on earth. You probably would say that science can't prove what happened 4 billion years ago, and neither can the Bible, so they are equivalent.

I know you would like to see "believers" and "deniers" as having equally valid claims. You think that would be fair. Americans like to believe that every issue has equally valid and opposing "sides." I would call that quaint. That must be a very comforting viewpoint. Everyone has a 50-50 chance of being right! But when YOU make a decision about what to believe, who flips your coin for you?

But you cannot see the difference, can you? The people who are studying anthropogenic climate change are carefully assessing and quantifying the effects of greenhouse gases on climate. The deniers are just shrugging.

Oh please. All the AGW people are doing is guessing. There is no direct link, no direct evidence. Its the butterfly flapping its wings scenario. The price of tea may rise, but the butterfly, may or may not have caused it.

I know you would like to see "believers" and "deniers" as having equally valid claims. You think that would be fair.

The hysterics don't really have valid claims, however most of the skeptics want to think that mankind has no influence at all over the earth, and thats nonsense too. The reality is somewhere in the middle, and until the scientists actually come up with proof, which they can't do, then its really all speculation. Informed speculation perhaps, but speculation none the less.

You are probably the kind of person who believes that a creation myth is a valid theory to explain life on earth. You probably would say that science can't prove what happened 4 billion years ago, and neither can the Bible, so they are equivalent.

5SpeedRacer5, what I belive to help me in my daily life is a personal matter between me God. My beliefs in creation are probably no different than those who still cling to the divinity of the Emperor of Japan. If you know what I am talking about, then you will have to accept that according to those who believe in his divinity, he is decendant from the Sun Goddess, and the creation myth that goes with that.

I understand evolution, and how the earth and universe was formed as evidenced by science. Just because I understand that, does not mean that I have my doubts about religious creation.

Funny how those who argue against people who don't accept that the world is going through Global Warming like to try and trot out that you must be some religious fanatic who dosen't accept science, unless it is their scienc. Well, I don't accept the science of the current pushers of the whole global warming scam.

Can we do more to improve the use of natural resources (like not paying 14 million yen for a fish to serve as a meal as posted here in JT) or conserving rain forests and reducing pollution, sure we can. But, to say that I have to pay an extra tax for a "carbon credit" so that some third world country can get more money to waste becuase their leaders choose to invest in themselves instead of infrastructure to help their own people solve their problems is taking things a bit too far, and I am not going to pay for it.

Can we do more to improve the use of natural resources (like not paying 14 million yen for a fish to serve as a meal as posted here in JT) or conserving rain forests and reducing pollution, sure we can. But, to say that I have to pay an extra tax for a "carbon credit" so that some third world country can get more money to waste becuase their leaders choose to invest in themselves instead of infrastructure to help their own people solve their problems is taking things a bit too far, and I am not going to pay for it.

O.K. Now this is interesting. I totally agree with you about carbon credit taxes but that is besides the point. But before I continue, I'd like to ask, do you believe it is possible that your strong distaste for the political ramifications has clouded your belief in the science in general? I'm not accusing. Just throwing that out there, with no malice intended. Anyway, through deforestation of the rain forests and normal forests and the ever-expanding tar and concrete parking lots that litter the landscape, we do create micro-weather systems. They are often only surface lows and are often called thermal lows. In and of itself, who cares. Thermal lows, blah blah blah. Agreed. But, when a baroclinic system moves through, the micro system can further deepen the transiting low. When this occurs, weather becomes more severe. The more we build, the more this occurs and the greater the impact on our weather. There. That's the best I can do without geeking out. But, that's the deal. Now you know.

And knowing is half the battle.

Taka

Taka313, I realize that things like the un-natural destruction of rain forests can have an effect on the environment, but those forests are being cut in the same countries that say we should be paying them carbon credits. If they want to stop the destruction, don't let the permits out.

Many other varibles such as solar activity and volcanic activity can have an effect on our weather patterns more so than we humans. So, it is not so much that it is a political reason why I don't believe. There are some valid points, but some of their tactics I am not in agreement with.

If ya believe in global warming you need to put your money - instead of others' - where your pie hole is. Sell the car, go vegan, and most importantly, go off the grid. Start with your laptop.