The Sound Of Settled Science

2012 could break record for fewest tornadoes;

Tornado season got off to a record start this year, with more twisters by mid-April than ever seen for that period since records began in 1950. After May, though, the number of tornadoes dropped off to a historic low. So far this year the United States has had only 888 tornadoes; last year, there were 1,691, according to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.

I blame the collapse of the US economy. In other words, Obama delivers!

13 Replies to “The Sound Of Settled Science”

  1. I am disappointed in every one of those graphs. Canada does not even regester … we are included with the rest of the world … and enviroMETALists the world over are condemming the Oil Sands?
    (It is sad that the Canadian Government still rejects the truth of Global Warming/Climate Change.)

  2. Me too Clown. I am shocked appalled and devastated
    that they can be so mean spirited and treat us in an exclusionary manner. It is time we started to raise awareness of this issue and insist on a zero tolerance policy toward this prejudice. After all, it’s for the children! If it saves just one life. As far as I’m concerned, it borders on racism.

  3. Climate science = selective science. The relevancy of any observation is not linked to predictions but its public relations value.
    Same with any solutions to the “problem” – highly selective. For instance, the US lowered its CO2, increased employment in the energy industry and lowered energy costs for consumers via fracking (the free market/technology model). Europe tried carbon pricing via taxes, cap ‘n trade and “investing” in green energy through subsidies. This has produced fuel poverty, unstable electrical supply/grids, loss of jobs and massive corruption in the ETS (the statist solution). Which model does the chattering classes -economists,journalists, activists, academics, progressive politicians,crony class etc- insist is the best model? The statist one of course.
    The free market and adaptation is clearly superior to government solutions and mitigation schemes. Obviously, it is not about what works, it is about increasing the size of government.

  4. To those who are “sad the Canadian Government still rejects the truth of Global Warming/Climate Change.)”, at the very least, make damned sure you E-mail Peter Kent on this,I have.
    Send a cc to your own MP,or if it’s a non-Conservative, send it to the nearest Conservative MP.
    The government,any government,will act only when there is an impetus from the citizens. Maybe some here who are retired and living in the Ottawa area should “occupy” Kent’s office,while armed with printouts of all the articles we can find on the falsehood of the Greatest Scam in History, AGW/CC.
    As Kate says,”not showing up to riot is a failed conservative policy”. Make some noise.

  5. You know what the ironic thing is? If they hadn’t used politics and junk ‘science’ to try frightening people into accepting the AGW theory, this could have been used to BOLSTER their argument.
    Despite the constant shrill screaming of the alarmists about catastrophic weather being caused by global warming, the truth is that a warmer climate is a less turbulent atmosphere. (Fewer things like hurricanes, tornadoes, etc.)
    But if they say that NOW, then they look like lying asshats that they are.
    So allow me a moment to get this out of my system…
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *ahem* Ok, I’m better now.

  6. a@c “Canada uses more CO2 them we produce but we’er the bad guys right.”
    Any deal Canada enters into must take in account the our big carbon sinks, forests and wood-frame construction. It should also take into account that our population is growing by taking other people’s peoples.
    It’s all crap that a dynamic climate with thousands of variables is controlled by one parts per million gas. If such a thesis arose in a non-political context, the laughter would be heard around the world.

  7. The atmospheres of both our neighbouring planets — Venus and Mars — are made of over 95% carbon dioxide. Does such a high concentration of CO2 lead to planetary warming there? If they aren’t warming do we with an atmosphere just .038% CO2 need to worry?

Navigation