Global Warming Hits New Orleans, Houston
New Orleans gets some snow — caused of course by Global Warming(TM).
For the first time in nearly four years, snow fell across the New Orleans region this morning, with flurries reported on the north shore and in the city, Metairie, Kenner, LaPlace and other parts of the south shore. By around 10 a.m., the snow had mostly stopped, replaced by freezing rain in many places, making driving treacherous. By noon, the precipitation had mostly ceased altogether.
By mid-morning, enough snow had accumulated on the ground in some areas to lure children and adults onto their front lawns to build snowmen or have snowball fights.
(photo courtesy – The Times Picayune)
And Houston got some white Global Warming as well. How’s the shoveling going, Peter H.?
Al Gore must be touring the South because I’ve been in Dallas all week and it has been cold as all get out.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
46 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Global Warming ™ will come true when Hell freezes over.
Comment by The other Peter H — December 11, 2008 @ 5:09 pm - December 11, 2008
Yes, we had some lite fluffy falling from the sky. Just in time for BHO to meet with Al’gortex in Chicago.
Dare we say it’s a “miracle”?
jeb n Houston
Comment by Jeb — December 11, 2008 @ 5:33 pm - December 11, 2008
We live about an hour north of NOLA and had six inches on the ground by 11am…global warming or not, it’s the most wonderful thing I think
I’ve ever seen. Our four year old hasn’t ever seen snow…never played in it…it might be the last time for a long time. Both his Daddies
were just as excited…we lived in California before moving here and it’s been a while for us too. Hope everyone is safe and spent some time enjoying it like we did.
Comment by David — December 11, 2008 @ 5:34 pm - December 11, 2008
sigh….it’s global climate change….not just warming but a change in weather patterns bringing more extreme weather and more frequent extreme weather events. The science here is far from certain, but I think it is counter productive to propagate the misleading term of global warming.
Comment by Guillermo — December 11, 2008 @ 6:08 pm - December 11, 2008
Well, we got hit with the snow flurries yesterday (Wed) about 4 pm – just in time for traffic! By 6 pm the flurries were a freakin’ blizzard. It didn’t stick to the ground until 8 pm, when everything was powdered.
Sad to say, it melted this morning as the sun rose.
Global warming my A$$. Algore is such a doofus.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — December 11, 2008 @ 6:32 pm - December 11, 2008
FOOLS! A buttefly in the Atlas Mountains doubled its wing beats due to swallows forced by global warming to fly higher into the mountains to find a butterfly meal. This in turn aroused swallow falcons to circle and exacerbate the updrafts which in turn brought an untimely siracco to rise across the Sahara and confront the Aegean low which normally dips to Alexandria at this time of year. The consequence was a funnel of pressure shifted through the Dardanelles which caught the trans-Siberian express in its formative stage. Quickly, the Kush current was diverted to wrap down over Myanmar and encounter the Malacca front. Ultimately, the Malacca front acted upon the Yap zipper gap which, in concert with the nursery zone for la Nina caused a trans Pacific vortex which sucked an errant raceway of the arctic jetway to dump snow on Houston, Galveston and New Orleans. Call Al Gore for how this could have been prevented.
Comment by heliotrope — December 11, 2008 @ 6:40 pm - December 11, 2008
Guillermo, forgive my ignorance, being just a dumb atavistic hick, but isn’t the climate constantly changing and evolving? Isn’t it kinda silly to think the climate never ever changed before humans showed up? That sounds kinda like Creationism to me. ;-0
Comment by V the K — December 11, 2008 @ 7:50 pm - December 11, 2008
Is Al Gore in Houston or New Orleans????
(Google the “Al Gore Effect”).
Comment by sonicfrog — December 11, 2008 @ 8:22 pm - December 11, 2008
Remember when THE ONE said this: “…this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal…”?
Well, ITS TRUE!!
We’re saved! Global warming is OVER! Do you hear me? OVER!!!!!!!!!
IT’S SNOWING IN NEW ORLEANS!
Comment by Cargosquid — December 11, 2008 @ 10:42 pm - December 11, 2008
I think they replaced Aslan is on the move! with Algore. That, or Hillary Frostybox was touring the south.
Yeah, when are we going to start seeing that? How about the last 3 hurricane seasons, eh? Back in 04, three storms crossed my county. The last 4 years, nothing.
Really? Last I heard, the debate was over and Algore wouldn’t lower himself to debate it with the prols.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 12, 2008 @ 1:37 am - December 12, 2008
I was interested to find this blog. 20 years ago I had a book published on different economic concepts to point the way to a sustainable world economy. Someone who liked the book contacted me this year to suggest that I update and re-publish it as a blog. She set up the blog, and the book is now complete on the blog in a series of postings. There are now also additional pieces on global warming and other subjects. Here is the link:
http://www.economicsforaroundearth.com
With all good wishes,
Charles Pierce
Comment by Charles Pierce — December 12, 2008 @ 9:09 am - December 12, 2008
Hee hee….I love the addition of “TM” to “Global Warming”. That makes me chuckle.
Comment by Mike — December 12, 2008 @ 12:19 pm - December 12, 2008
Science based on reason. Stupidity that reproduces is genetically inferior and dies.
Humans that ignore the effect of our actions on the planet deserve to die. The world will be a better place when we are extinct, and the best part is it’s all part of GODS PLAN so ignore reality and wait for Jebus.
Comment by Kelly L — December 12, 2008 @ 3:10 pm - December 12, 2008
#13 – “Stupidity that reproduces is genetically inferior and dies.”
Then how do you explain Democrats?
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — December 12, 2008 @ 4:24 pm - December 12, 2008
Then how do you explain Democrats?
Welfare.
The Democrats have figured out that the key to maintaining power in American society is making the population as stupid and helpless as it can possibly be. Hence why the Democrat Party rewards failure, leads efforts to strip math, science, and reading education out of schools, and attempts to block anything that would condition receiving government payments on actually working or even attempting to work.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — December 12, 2008 @ 7:20 pm - December 12, 2008
Kelly L, are you by chance working for the Sony Films promotions dept. handling “The Day The Earth Stood Still”???
Comment by sonicfrog — December 12, 2008 @ 7:35 pm - December 12, 2008
The Democrats have figured out that the key to maintaining power in American society is making the population as stupid and helpless as it can possibly be.
Seems to be working in Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, and Cullyfornyuh.
Comment by V the K — December 12, 2008 @ 8:28 pm - December 12, 2008
We’re bracing for up to 6 inches of global warming this weekend.
Let is snow! Let it snow! Let it snow!
Comment by American Elephant — December 13, 2008 @ 3:16 am - December 13, 2008
I’m as skeptical as anyone about global warming. But when have even the most ardent believers of global warming ever said that it will never snow in the South again? Their concern is what the overall affect will be with an average temperature of 1, 2, or 5 degrees higher than it has been will have. Even an increase of 5 degrees does not mean it will never snow again, even in the South. But it will mean that more of the polar ice will melt. The question is whether this or other changes will harm life on Earth as we know it. It doesn’t matter to me whether this is manmade, part of a natural climate cycle, or a combination of both at this point. If irreparable damage is possible, then it behooves us to try and do something about it. Or come up with a plan if we can’t stop the damage that will occur.
Hence why the Democrat Party rewards failure, leads efforts to strip math, science, and reading education out of schools,
The Democrats are doing a lousy job in NJ then. We still require math, science, and reading in schools.
and attempts to block anything that would condition receiving government payments on actually working or even attempting to work.
That part is true, unfortunately. But this is a collaborative effort. When Republicans were in power in this state (we don’t have filibusters or the garbage the U.S. Senate has with the 60 vote cloture thing), things didn’t change then either.
Comment by Pat — December 13, 2008 @ 7:34 am - December 13, 2008
The Democrats are doing a lousy job in NJ then. We still require math, science, and reading in schools.
No, you only require that courses labeled as such be numbered in the curriculum. What the Democrat-run schools actually teach is a mush of socialism, self-esteem, and global warming alarmism.
Comment by V the K — December 13, 2008 @ 10:02 am - December 13, 2008
And even with the dumbed down curriculum, union-run schools still stink.
Comment by V the K — December 13, 2008 @ 10:06 am - December 13, 2008
#19 Pat,
I am not skeptical about global warming. It is a naturally recurring cycle. I am skeptical about man caused global warming and I am unabashedly driven to disbelief that a “consensus of scientists” have gone all Chicken Little on the topic. What a bunch of Luddites these people are.
Furthermore, these same prophetic doomsday scientists hatch up all manner of silly stuff to slow the destruction of the earth and mankind. They are no more than Greeks tripping off to Delphi to offer treasure to gods.
Oracle Gore and his chorus of croaking frogs say Gaia must be appeased in the name of “consensus science.” We must tip toe through the tulips without leaving a carbon footprint. Otherwise, the hole in the ozone will get you. (What ever happened to the hole in the ozone?)
All this from the people who can not find the root cause of why the housing bubble burst or why The Big Three don’t make money in the same country where Toyota, Honda, BMW, Volkswagen, etc. do.
We need a global warming czar to run the planet for us. How about Dr. Phil?
Comment by heliotrope — December 13, 2008 @ 10:26 am - December 13, 2008
Heliotrope, it may well be a cycle and only that. Even if it is, when did the last cycle occur when the average temperatures were as high as they are now? Thousands of years ago? If this causes the oceans to rise high enough that New York and San Francisco (even if many think that is not so much a bad thing), and other locations, I would say the consequences could be dire. This wasn’t such a bad thing when this happened thousands of years ago.
By the way, I don’t think global warming, whether natural or man-made, is not going to destroy the Earth. Heck, even if a few thousand nuclear warheads detonated, Earth will still survive. Human existence as we know it may not.
The ozone hole is still there. Things have been getting a little better in recent years, but the hole grew again, because Antarctica has been colder than average this year. In fact, it’s the Arctic that has seen the large rise of temperatures and is having the huge ice melt.
Comment by Pat — December 13, 2008 @ 12:12 pm - December 13, 2008
Oops. Meant to say that global warming will not destroy the Earth.
Comment by Pat — December 13, 2008 @ 12:13 pm - December 13, 2008
And now my Mormon friends are coming over to help me decorate the Christmas tree I bought from the Boy Scouts. It’s the mostest politically incorrectest Christmas Ever!
Comment by V the K — December 13, 2008 @ 3:02 pm - December 13, 2008
My tree, which I bought from KMart a couple of years ago, is going up tomorrow. My partner, may give me hand. But then again, I didn’t help him with all of the Hanukkah decorations, which took all of 15 minutes to put up.
Comment by Pat — December 13, 2008 @ 4:11 pm - December 13, 2008
Not to mention that the Mason Dixon is pretty far north. There’s a lot of places in the South that get snow on a regular basis.
Florida’s been covered with water before. Whale fossils and shark’s teeth are all over the place here in the “Bone Valley” area. I can tell you where on a map whale fossils have been found. This begs the question what caused Florida to have been under water before.
I’m also waiting for liberals to explain to me how forcing us to use mercury filled lightbulbs made in China is going to save the world.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 14, 2008 @ 3:03 am - December 14, 2008
TGC,
The standard light bulb is dumb looking, gets dim and takes several people to install.
The new light source is weird, runs on excited vapors, and is screwy from top to bottom. What better symbol of liberalism can you think of?
Comment by heliotrope — December 14, 2008 @ 10:41 am - December 14, 2008
Heh.
Add Your Own Punchline: How many liberals does it take to SCREW in a lightbulb?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 15, 2008 @ 1:22 am - December 15, 2008
Is that where they screw? In a lightbulb? Wow! Whodathunkit?
Comment by heliotrope — December 15, 2008 @ 10:57 am - December 15, 2008
Well Pat, they said the Arctic would be ice-free this summer… and they were wrong.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 15, 2008 @ 3:05 pm - December 15, 2008
1) What “irreparable damage” do you foresee? Are the oceans going to rise 300 feet? Is the Earth’s atmosphere going to lose its oxygen component?
2) How would you propose to stop it?
3) Why would you think that your plan will stop it? Remember, even if we cut CO2 emissions today, there wouldn’t be any impact in the computer-generated climate models (such as they are) for a good 30-50 years.
4) Or if we can’t stop it, what other “plan” do we come up with? With what goal in mind?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 15, 2008 @ 3:10 pm - December 15, 2008
Very good questions, ILC.
Comment by V the K — December 15, 2008 @ 6:01 pm - December 15, 2008
I agree, excellent questions, ILC. First of all, I wasn’t aware that some have predicted that the Arctic would be completely icefree this past summer, or would ever be completely ice-free.
I don’t have complete answers for your questions, but here goes.
1. I have no idea how high the oceans will rise. They have risen slightly, from what I understand, and will probably rise more as more of the Arctic ice melts. The landscape of the Earth could change, with more of the coastal areas under water. That could cause a little damage to the economy. I don’t know what would happen to the oxygen component. It apparently has fluctuated in Earth’s history.
2. I don’t have a proposal to stop it. As you suggest, the measures we take now, even if they affect CO_2 emissions may not do anything. I think we should take some of the steps that are being proposed, not so much for global warming, but to end our dependence on foreign oil.
3. If it takes that long, but it does have a positive impact, better late than never.
4. Build seawalls and/or move to higher land. The goal would be to minimize the negative effects of the economy and standards of living as much as possible, and thrive in spite of these changes.
Comment by Pat — December 16, 2008 @ 8:33 am - December 16, 2008
Ice-free Arctic: The predictions made headlines last spring. Here is a typical example from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/weather/06/27/north.pole.melting/
I will admit that CNN, ABC, etc. said that the Arctic “could” be ice-free, not that it “would” be. But the fact that they gave this (non)story oxygen at all, when so much more real and important things were/are going on in the world, functionally means that they want to create alarm in people: they wanted people to think/fear that the Arctic would be ice-free, or is on the verge of being ice-free, or will soon be ice-free. It wasn’t / isn’t / won’t.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 16, 2008 @ 8:56 am - December 16, 2008
1) I do have an idea. They have risen inches, and, if the Earth may yet warm fully to the Medieval Climate Optimum (which it has NOT done) or even beyond, they may rise a couple feet. We can certainly build dikes to handle that. All this stuff you read from the U.N. about them rising six feet, twelve feet or more is agenda-driven malarkey. As for the scenarios in the Hollywood environment-disaster movies: nuts.
As for the oxygen component of the Earth’s atmosphere: absolutely nothing is going to happen to it. Photosynthetic life thrives on CO2 – and inherently converts it back to oxygen (and carbohydrates, i.e., food). The more CO2 there is, the more photosynthetic life will tend to thrive wherever it is, and the more oxygen there will be. I think it would be nice to conserve the Amazon and other rainforests for future human use, but in terms of the oxygen component, it does not matter if we do.
2) That’s an honest answer, thank you. My own answer would be that, since there is not going to be irreparable damage, having a plan to ‘prevent’ it would be irrational.
P.S. Since oil is a fungible commodity, we will never end the world’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil, even if we produce more or end our own dependence. Having said that: We should produce more energy domestically, both of oil and of other kinds of energy, as a way to increase our economy’s real output and hence, our living standard.
4) Good answer. Please note, however, that world climates becoming warmer is a *net good* set of changes. To the extent that the Earth has been getting warmer, we have *benefitted* from it. New farmland is coming into existence. Existing farmland can be made more productive. Deaths from winter freezing, which outnumber deaths from summer heat significantly, should go down. All the best periods in human history have coincided with the Earth getter warmer; the painful periods, where civilization has decayed, have coincided with the Earth getting cooler. Give me global warming, any day.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 16, 2008 @ 9:12 am - December 16, 2008
(“We should produce more energy domestically”… Sorry, I meant that we should ALLOW more domestic energy production. I’m only interested in production that is genuinely profitable as determined by the market; not subsidized production or production for its own sake.)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 16, 2008 @ 9:16 am - December 16, 2008
yeah, once again you ignore the trends in global climate / temperatures in the last several decades – the loss of things like permafrost, etc which are the real indicators of global warming.
20: Really? and what are your credentials in public education? (aside from complaining about it?)
Comment by Kevin — December 17, 2008 @ 1:56 am - December 17, 2008
Kevin, it appears that Al Gore and others have ignored trends for thousands of years showing that temperature has fluctuated. As ILC alluded to, there was a period of warming in the 800-1300 in which the peak temperature is still higher than the temperatures we’ve hit in the current warming. I’m not saying there isn’t a problem. There may well be. This could have an effect whether or not this warming is being exacerbated by manmade causes or not. I think Gore, et al, have to make the case that this period of global warming is different. For example, do they have proof that the loss of permafrost didn’t occur during the previous global warming periods?
ILC, I read an article about the climate fluctuations, and it makes a lot of the points you’ve made. The one thing that concerns me somewhat are the CO_2 emissions. The point was made that almost all of the emissions are natural. But the percentage of manmade CO_2 is not insignificant anymore. This is the first time that this has happened. So this could, in fact, lead to global warming much worse than what we’ve had in the past ten thousand years or so. On the other hand, the article suggests that we could also be on the cusp of a cooling era much colder than what we’ve had in the past the past ten thousand years, since we’re about due for that. If so, burning more coal may just help.
Comment by Pat — December 17, 2008 @ 7:45 am - December 17, 2008
A challenge no Global Warm-Monger has ever been able to answer: If a televangelist preached that drinking, gambling, and fornication would take you straight to hell… and then was caught drunk, at a casino, with a prostitute, would you doubt he seriously believed what he was preaching?
OK, then, why should we believe Al Gore and all the other Prophets of Climate Doom when they travel the world on carbon-spewing private jets and own gigantic houses that consume many times the energy of average Americans?
Comment by V the K — December 17, 2008 @ 10:47 am - December 17, 2008
Wow. Even *I* sort of implicitly bought the idea that Arctic ice melt *could* make the oceans rise. I apologize for the error. Ed Morrissey corrects me. Ed quotes James O’Brien, a prominent supporter of Global Warmist alarmism who, however, wants people to get the science right:
When the Arctic melts, the oceans go *down*. What could make the oceans rise, possibly, is land ice melt. However, there isn’t a lot of that that wouldn’t be compensated by sea ice melt. Take Antarctica, where admittedly there is a lot of land ice. Well, Antartica also has a lot of sea ice (still). Any melt of Antarctic land ice should be partially offset by a concurrent melt of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 17, 2008 @ 1:06 pm - December 17, 2008
Sorry, maybe my latter theory is shaky too. Aargh. Too early in the morning.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 17, 2008 @ 1:09 pm - December 17, 2008
Yeah – If and when the Arctic or Antarctic sea ice melts, the oceans stay exactly the same – that was O’Brien’s point. The runoff of land icemelt can still raise the oceans. A little. They’re pretty big to begin with.
Another scientist quoted by Morrissey says,
If true… *very* interesting.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 17, 2008 @ 1:36 pm - December 17, 2008
There’s a lot of people out there who think “Waterworld” and “The Day After Tomorrow” were documentaries.
Comment by V the K — December 17, 2008 @ 1:39 pm - December 17, 2008
Many interesting articles and links collected here:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 17, 2008 @ 9:05 pm - December 17, 2008
Good roundup from an Aussie on The 10 worst warming predictions.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — December 18, 2008 @ 4:46 pm - December 18, 2008