President Obama declared the Red River floods in North Dakota and Minnesota a wake up call to take global warming seriously. As with most global warming alarmists, he opened his mouth before checking the facts. In reality North Dakota and Minnesota, the sources of the Red River, had a much colder than normal winter (Dec-Feb). For North Dakota it was the 18th coldest and for Minnesota the 19th coldest in the past 114 years. From the Minneapolis StarTribune:
President Obama used the flooding in the Red River Valley to insist that society needs to take global warming seriously.
In a White House interview with a handful of reporters, including Janell Cole of the Forum of Fargo, the president said the current flooding cannot necessarily be blamed on global warming, but he said it should be a signal to act.
But here are the facts (First map is temp anomalies, despite the incorrect title, and the second is state rankings):
In reality the flooding comes from a heavy snow pack and a spring thaw, compounded by the northward flow into a still frozen river downstream.
I wish the alarmists would tell us in advance whether global warming causes droughts or floods, whether it will cause Great Lakes levels to go up or down. Every trend away from the norm seems to be caused by global warming. Ask them what global cooling would do and you get a very blank loo
k.
In reality the flooding comes from a heavy snow pack and a spring thaw, compounded by the northward flow into a still frozen river downstream.
I wish the alarmists would tell us in advance whether global warming causes droughts or floods, whether it will cause Great Lakes levels to go up or down. Every trend away from the norm seems to be caused by global warming. Ask them what global cooling would do and you get a very blank loo
k.
7 comments:
Obama is a stupid man which is why he had his college transcripts sealed. His being illegal could be tolerated if he was not so dumb. He believes in global warming because he was told it is true and real because the United Stated has caused it. Simple!
From the excerpts published here, I'd say it's not clear that Mr. Obama was directly linking the Red River Floods & global warming. It might well be that he's warning us to anticipate weather extremes, such as flooding, due to global warming.
He could be right; keep an open mind. "Freak weather" is how I heard it described some 20 years ago, wild swings from one extreme to another. I like that idea. But it's so hard to tell; is recent weather an anomaly or new trend?
The Red River flows north, that's significant. It's thawed ground feeding frozen channel, and for that reason alone the river is one you'd wouldn't want to cozy up to, at least not in springtime, unless on stilts. I wonder if it flooded as much when it was all in prairie.
Michael Melius
Hermosa, SD
obama does not believe in global warming. he is lying. We have a criminals running our government. Look at 911(done by pentagon), invasions of other nations, ok city bombing done by elements in govt. ect. we are screwed!
Of course, no one with any intelligence really believes in so-called 'global warming'. But there's a real zeal in promoting this BS because there's a bigger agenda at play. It's all about world control. Most socialist seem to relish the idea of a one-world government, where everyone is equal under one ruler, and global warming is all about equalising the developed and poorer nations. Eventually the EU and the North American Union and the Asian Union will all come together as one government.
There's the new consensus catch phrase popped out by Michael.
Back when the world stopped warming in an obvious way a few years ago (it hit a peak in 1998 but the marked cooling started in 2007) the anthro global warming grifters had to adjust the language to match (another proof this is a political power grab), so global warming morphed into climate change.
Now that it's become clear to all that climate change means colder inspite of more and more co2, climate change is out.
The new party approved language is extreme weather.
Notice that the trend is toward ever more vague terminology.
These Carbon Taxers could care less about the weather. They have a goal, and if understanding their science is like nailing jello to a wall, so much the better.
After controlling for population growth and property values, there has been no increase in damages from severe weather-related events.
Tornados are freak weather events, are they not? Here is a graph of tornado fatalities from 1916 -2005.
Either there are less tornadoes altogether, or the boat already sailed on anticipating weather extremes.
I was in Dakota last week by a business travel (selling viagra online products) and the global warming in there, is serious. Definitely if people don't do any to control it, this problem will increase.
I think your missing something key in your analysis. Wouldn't the speed in temperature changes be important?
Post a Comment