Greenhouse Gases Drop to 15-Yr Low

Remember when prominent liberals said that we needed to cool the U.S. economy to fight global warming?!? Weird how the mainstream liberal media doesn’t follow-up on those earlier proclamations, now that people are struggling in this limp economy. Why aren’t Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Browner, and other liberals all proclaiming their efforts at fighting climate change a success by the crippling of the U.S. economy through socialist policies? Hmmm? Anyone?

Thulsa Doom Obama is getting what he wanted. High fuel prices. Government dependence. Higher debt and deficits. But lower carbon emissions. This country is heading to hell.

In total, in 2009 emissions of the greenhouse gases, which are linked to climate change, were the equivalent of 6,640 metric tons of carbon dioxide, down from 7,062 metric tons in 2008 and a high of 7,265 metric tons in 2007. U.S. emissions in 2009 were more than 7% greater than 1990 levels, the report said.

[From U.S. Greenhouse Gases Drop to 15-Year Low - Culture - Fox Nation]

EPA: CO2 Supplants Saccharin as Environmental Threat

Seems like the politics, fear campaigns, and brouhahas of the present day will always give way to the next generation of scams designed to implant further government regulation, oversight, and control. CO2--that gas that you exhale every moment--has been deemed a 'threat' for climatic warming by our lovely liberal government (though the weather outside is currently frightful). You can see where the scares of old end up...in the scrap heap of history. No more 60 Minutes news stories with the nervous, chain-smoking CEO on saccharin's dangers now.

Now the obvious conclusion that no one seems to be making in our "skeptical media." If the EPA thinks saccharin is not 'a threat after all then maybe CO2 isn't either. I guess we'll have to wait a few decades for the newest, lamest scare to come along.

CHICAGO – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has dropped the artificial sweetener saccharin from its list of hazardous substances, the agency said on Tuesday.

The white crystalline powder used in diet drinks, chewing gum and juice was dubbed a potential cancer-causing agent in 1980. While a review by the National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on Cancer cleared saccharin in the late 1990s, it has remained on the EPA's potential hazard list.

[From EPA Says Saccharin Not a Threat After All - FoxNews.com]

The Obama administration has said it will regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants amid opposition from industry and Republicans in Congress.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it would regulate emissions from fossil fuel power plants by 2011 and petroleum refineries by 2012.

President Barack Obama is pushing the EPA to cut emissions after a climate bill failed in Congress this year.

But Republican lawmakers have said the EPA's new rules will harm the economy.

[From BBC News - Obama to regulate greenhouse gases from power plants]

$700K Cow Burp-Fart Study

Your tax dollars hard at work. We all know how detrimental farts are to the environment. Please shove a cork in it, immediately.

DURHAM – University of New Hampshire and outside researchers are creating a computer model to help organic dairy farmers cut greenhouse gas emissions such as methane, because Beano probably isn't an option.

Nitrogen- and carbon-based greenhouse gases are produced via a complicated system at dairy farms that is affected by everything from the weather to the soil to the feed to cow burps, among other things.

"Cows emit most of their methane through belching, only a small fraction from flatulence," said the project's principal investigator, Ruth Varner of UNH's Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space.

UNH has been awarded a $700,000 U.S. Department of Agriculture grant to create a computer model that measures the amount of greenhouse gases an organic dairy farm produces and thus provide ways to cut those emissions.

[From UNH scientists to study cow burps . . . and more - Thursday, Nov. 4, 2010]

Cows Off the Hook, Now

Looks like cows are NOW being given a reprieve as co-culprits of global warming (not really "co-" because humans farm and then eat the cows...so it's still OUR fault), whereas we were once told that Al Gore's cow-chomping tendencies were the ultimate in global warming hypocrisy (so many examples of Gore's hypocrisy from which to choose). LOL! The article implies that CO2 is the most potent greenhouse gas, and that's a lie. Methane is far more potent. Water vapor...yes, water vapor...is the MOST potent greenhouse gas; CO2 is CHUMP-CHANGE compared to H2O.

I'm sure the EPA will declare H2O a public emergency soon.

"It's been generally assumed that if you increase livestock numbers you get a rise in emissions of nitrous oxide. This is not the case," he said.

Estimated nitrous oxide emissions from temperate grasslands in places like Inner Mongolia as well as vast swatches of the United States, Canada, Russia and China account for up a third of the total amount of the greenhouse gas produced every year. Nitrous oxide is the third most important greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide and methane.

But Dr Butterbach-Bahl pointed out that the study did not take into account the methane produced by the livestock or the carbon dioxide produced if soil erodes. He also pointed out that much of the red meat eaten in the western world if from intensively farmed animals in southern countries.

He said the study does not overturn the case for cutting down on red meat but shows grazing livestock is not always bad for global warming.

[From Cows absolved of causing global warming with nitrous oxide - Telegraph]

Enviro-Nazis: Outlaw Air Conditioning

Still don't believe this climate change BS is a complete political power-grab to go along with all the other lies, stupidity, and brainwashing being foisted upon us by the "Change" of Thulsa Doom Obama and his minions? I've already told you. Your modern, Western, capitalist-dog lifestyle is killing the planet and keeping the parasites of society down. The liberals are going to fix your capitalist ass, one way or another.

Remember all the other vestiges of capitalism that have been in the crosshairs? Computers, air travel, beach bonfires, video games, cars, fast food restaurants, flat screen TVs, iPods (pay attention, Steve Jobs), meat, and toilet paper (to name just a few I've written about on here). Now you can add air conditioning to the list. Basically, if it comes from oil, is produced using oil, or brought to market by way of oil, you can bet the liberals want to regulate it somehow.

Of course, the key to all these capitalist evils is to remove and/or regulate them as a "solution" to climate change (which doesn't even f'ing exist). Let's be honest...the real solution they're peddling is socialism, plain and simple.

This isn't smart. In a country that's among the world's highest greenhouse-gas emitters, air conditioning is one of the worst power-guzzlers. The energy required to air-condition American homes and retail spaces has doubled since the early 1990s. Turning buildings into refrigerators burns fossil fuels, which emits greenhouse gases, which raises global temperatures, which creates a need for -- you guessed it -- more air-conditioning.

A.C.'s obvious public-health benefits during severe heat waves do not justify its lavish use in everyday life for months on end. Less than half a century ago, America thrived with only the spottiest use of air conditioning. It could again. While central air will always be needed in facilities such as hospitals, archives and cooling centers for those who are vulnerable to heat, what would an otherwise A.C.-free Washington look like?

[From In the heat wave, the case against air conditioning]

Poll: American Global Warming Concerns Decline Further

Of course, this poll only addresses the question about global warming overall. In other words, the poll answers the question about whether global warming is believed to be occurring. It’s a good question. Natural climate change seems to be pushing temperatures the other way, unless you believe the alarmists’ silly, revisionist excuses for why we’ve had several years of record-setting cold winters and summers.

I wonder, after proper education on all sides of scientific climate theory—including the skeptical views on CO2 and scientific data backing those views, whether the public would accept the core premise of global warming alarmists, which is really the only central issue in my opinion. That question is, “Do you think manmade CO2 is warming the Earth?”

Because global warming and global cooling, as part of natural climate variability, DO HAPPEN. That’s not at issue. The issue is whether capitalist-driven greenhouse gas emissions (i.e., CO2) are driving temperatures, and whether socialist solutions to offset capitalism and thus “decrease warming” (because oil is the lifeblood of worldwide economies) will really do anything except raise energy prices and harm economies (and we’ve seen multiple instances in the news where liberals have said we need to cool our economy to fight global warming).

In other words, only the leftiest of liberals seem unable to discern (actually they’re just pretending) the political connection to this so-called “science.” It’s clear in the data (and in the recent scandals – i.e., “hide the decline”) that CO2 may rise AFTER warming and that it eventually reaches a saturation point (i.e., the point at which it no longer has any warming properties on the atmosphere). So many aspects of real science are avoided in debate with the words “consensus says.”

PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup's annual update on Americans' attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years has become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientists themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.

[From Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop ]

Methane Released After Warming? CO2 Also?

They're losing the battle. So what do they do? Abandon CO2 as the boogeyman, or at least imply that our increasing CO2 has released long-trapped methane. But wait...if methane can be released from trapped ice during warming periods, this means that CO2 can ALSO be released. And we've seen that atmospheric CO2 increases tend to follow warming...not the other way around.

Don't trust these clowns. They are stained by scandal and they approach climate science with a preordained outcome; they never entertain or propose other theories. There is dissension among scientists (and there a lot of skeptical scientists contrary to what you've been told). Remember Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit.

Concerns about global warming have centered on rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but scientists note that methane can be 30 times more effective at trapping heat than carbon dioxide.

[From FOXNews.com - Methane Bubbles in Arctic Raise Warming Fears]

EPA’s Got You Where They Want You

Here’s that slippery slope that the Supreme Court opened the door on. Look for Obama to be the leader to go stumbling over that slope, ala Chevy Chase. Here’s where government bureaucrats look to cement control over our economy and your lives for the foreseeable future—all in the name of saving your ass, because they deem you too dumb to know better.

This moron below says that this finding will “end the era of denial on global warming.” I’m sorry, but his little report or their insignificant governmental actions have no effect whatsoever on science and reality—global warming is not real, and it won’t suddenly become real because they say so and begin regulating farts and other gases.

This would be funny if it weren’t so damn serious. I hope America will wake up out there, before they take us over the edge of this slippery slope—the very thing they accuse us “deniers” of doing.

EPA Says Global Warming a Public Danger

Declaring that greenhouse gases are a significant threat to human health, the Environmental Protection Agency proposes regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as pollutants.

WASHINGTON -- The White House is reviewing a proposed finding by the Environmental Protection Agency that global warming is a threat to public health and welfare.

Such a declaration would be the first step to regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act and could have broad economic and environmental ramifications. It also would likely spur action by Congress to address climate change more broadly.

The White House acknowledged Monday that the EPA had transmitted its proposed finding on global warming to the Office of Management and Budget, but provided no details. It also cautioned that the Obama administration, which sees responding to climate change a top priority, nevertheless is ready to move cautiously when it comes to actually regulating greenhouse gases, preferring to have Congress act on the matter.

The Supreme Court two years ago directed the EPA to decide whether greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels, pose a threat public health and welfare because they are warming the earth. If such a finding is made, these emissions are required to be regulated under the Clean Air Act, the court said.

***

Such a finding "will officially end the era of denial on global warming," said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., whose Energy and Commerce subcommittee is crafting global warming legislation. He said such an endangerment finding is long overdue because of the Bush administration's refusal to address the issue.

***

"It's to their interest to say the sky is falling, but it's not. ... The truth is we've never had to sacrifice air quality to maintain a healthy economy. The EPA has discretion to do this in a reasonable way."

Farmers Fight Fart Tax

Wrote about this stupidity a while ago too. Good on the farmers for fighting dumb crap. I hope all of you sheep out there wake up and fight this baloney, before it’s too late.

European Farmers Protest Proposals to Tax Cow Flatulence

Proposals to tax the flatulence of cows and other livestock have been denounced by farming groups in the Irish Republic and Denmark.

A cow tax of $18 per animal has been mooted in Ireland, while Denmark is discussing a levy as high as $110 per cow to offset the potential penalties each country faces from European Union legislation aimed at combating global warming.

Economy Be Damned: Report Your AGW Gases! (EPA)

The glorious EPA, emboldened by its new POTUS climate champion, is ready to invoke Stalin-esque tactics in dealing with you capitalist companies out there, who are doing your best to prop up and save this pathetic economy from the doom with which the new POTUS wants to orchestrate from behind his climate-cooking TelePrompters (he can pass all his expensive government programs that way—per Rahm Emmanuel’s ‘No Wasted Crisis’ philosophy).

Remember…key Democratic leaders and other liberal elites have claimed several times that we needed to cool down the world economy to fight global warming; now they got what they wanted, and no media person anywhere has questioned them about those statements.

EPA May Require Factories to Report Warming Emissions

March 10 (Bloomberg) -- Chemical, steel, automobile and other energy-intensive factories would have to submit annual reports to the federal government on their greenhouse gas emissions under a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposal that lays a foundation for fighting global warming.

About 13,000 facilities that account for as much as 90 percent of greenhouse gas emissions would have to comply, the EPA said in a statement today. The first reports would be submitted in 2011 and cover emissions in 2010, according to the proposal. Car and engine makers would begin their reports for 2011 models.

Fuel Taxes to Lower Greenhouse Gases

Contrast this article with the one a few days ago. What does that tell you? What side does the media take with regard to environmental taxation?

I keep wondering when the world will wake up and call this scam for what it is, but there are apparently enough sheep grazing out there to allow the lefty-enviro-politicians of the world to milk every last cent out of ‘global warming.’

These taxes (your money)—just like cigarette taxes that were going to be used to pay for smoking-related health costs but weren’t—will not be used to fight CO2, a natural, necessary gas for life (not a pollutant). Oh yes, cigarette taxes were also going to discourage smoking while also paying for healthcare? If people stopped smoking because of the taxes then where would the tax revenue come from to pay for the healthcare? No one stopped smoking because of the taxes. These taxes had nothing to do with the reasoning claimed.

The revenue from this silly fuel tax will go to some government program that will have no worth other than giving its staff members a permanent job. That job will morph into something else, once the green fad and global warming are tossed into the dustbin of history. Since there's already no global warming, the politicians can claim that their tax "fixed it." Neat scam, huh?

Swedish government to raise fuel taxes to cut greenhouse gases

Until voters in free countries stand up to this tomfoolery, they’ll continue to tell us that they’re saving us by raising our taxes. Come on people! Don’t you see this for what it is??!

Stockholm - Higher taxes on vehicles and fuel are in store for Swedish motorists, transport companies and industry as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the government said Tuesday. Finance Minister Anders Borg, Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren and Enterprise Minister Maud Olofsson said in a joint statement that the measures would take the current financial slump into account.

As of 2011 taxes on diesel fuel were to be raised in two stages by 0.40 kronor (0.04 dollars), as would taxes on carbon-dioxide emissions while the forestry and agriculture sectors would be included in emissions trading schemes.

The measures that included taxes on heating were part of a pending bill on energy and enviroment, and the goal was to cut greenhouse gas emissions by a further 2 million tons by 2020.

"A price tag on climate changing emissions underlines that emissions carry a cost that have to be paid," Carlgren said.

EPA to Regulate Your Breath

Welcome aboard the BS Express, ladies and gentlemen. You voted for it so you deserve everything you've got coming; Government is now going to rule your lives. I love how these mainstream news outlets continue to ignore reality, because it inconveniently gets in the way of the agenda.

CO2 is NOT A POLLUTANT, YOU MORONS!

E.P.A. Expected to Regulate Carbon Dioxide

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to act for the first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet, according to top Obama administration officials.

The decision, which most likely would play out in stages over a period of months, would have a profound impact on transportation, manufacturing costs and how utilities generate power. It could accelerate the progress of energy and climate change legislation in Congress and form a basis for the United States' negotiating position at United Nations climate talks set for December in Copenhagen.

Exxon suddenly is "green?"

I think I just swallowed my tongue. There has to be an ulterior motive here...I don't know what it is, but there must be one. Why would an oil company suddenly support this BS when the myth of global warming is crashing down worldwide. Maybe that provides a clue as the "support."

Exxonmobil corp., the world's largest crude oil refiner, supports taxing carbon dioxide as the most efficient way of curbing greenhouse gas emissions, its chief executive said.

"As a businessman, it's hard to speak favourably about any new tax, but a carbon tax strikes me as a more direct, more transparent and more effective approach," Rex Tillerson, CEO of the Irving, Texas based company, said Thursday at the Woodrow Wilson international center for scholars in Washington.

[From Exxon supports carbon tax]

California: Brilliant alarmists have AGW answers

California has been featured on this blog many times, because a large number of its politicians and 'thinkers' are all too ready to adopt any crazy 'environmental solution' that comes down the pike. There's nothing wrong with wanting to save energy due to shortages in your state; however, squeaking in that little phrase "reducing greenhouse gases" immediately marries this initiative to halting global warming, a simple myth primarily designed to drive government intervention in our lives and provide wealth and power to its political proponents.

One should also be aware that manufacturers won't pay for the costs of increasing television efficiencies, as this article cleverly avoids mentioning. The article, predictably, plays up the positive: Consumers will save money on their energy bills! But consumers will pay more for the televisions (manufacturers will pass on the costs), so it's still an indirect tax on capitalist consumers.

Increasing TV energy efficiency provides a triple benefit to California by boosting the economy, lowering electricity ratepayers' utility bills and helping the state meet its goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 15% by 2020, Larson said. "Every dollar spent on energy efficiency returns $2 in savings," he added.

[From Flat-screen TVs to face energy-efficiency rules in California - Los Angeles Times]

Not satisfied with their already hefty tax revenues (CA is one of the most taxed states in the country), San Francisco plans to 'protect the environment' by charging drivers to drive in areas considered 'congested.' Again, this is just a tax. Governments don't really believe in global warming either, but it's a useful scapegoat to tax your ass once more.

The plan faces opponents in the city's business community. On Dec. 22, the president of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, Steve Falk, wrote in an op-ed article in The San Francisco Chronicle that such tolls amount to a "stealth tax." The headline on the article was "San Francisco Is Not London."

The economic downturn also has prompted caution. During his second inaugural address a year ago, the city's mayor, Gavin Newsom, called congestion pricing "the single greatest step we can take to protect our environment and improve our quality of life."

[From Nation & World | San Francisco considers plan to charge drivers | Seattle Times Newspaper]

EPA 'Cow Tax'

Now that the Lord Messiah Obama is due to assume power, we can probably count on this EPA plan, similar taxes, and additional expensive plans designed to "halt" the stupid hoax of global warming. Cow farts be damned! Not damned...they'll just tax them. They'll tax your ass into the ground...until you reside in a completely socialist state, unless you tell them to stick it!

One thing you can count on--they could care less about 'greenhouse gases.' To politicians like Al Gore, this is just a vehicle to more government control of your lives.

“The tax for dairy cows could be $175 per cow, and $87.50 per head of beef cattle. The tax on hogs would upwards of $20 per hog,” the release said. “Any operation with more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef cattle or 200 hogs would have to obtain permits.”

Kate Galbraith, correspondent for The New York Times, noted on the Times’ “Green Inc.” blog that such a “proposal is far from being enacted” and that the “hysteria may be premature.”

But Rick Krause, senior director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau, warned it’s certainly feasible – especially based on the rhetoric of President-elect Barack Obama and the use of the EPA to combat global warming. Such action by an Obama administration would take an act of Congress for livestock to be exempt.

[From EPA 'Cow Tax' Could Charge $175 per Dairy Cow to Curb Greenhouse Gases]

PETA mad at Al for chewing on a cow

Remember? Cow farts are deadly!

Why question just Al Gore’s diet? Why not point out all the other hypocrisies associated with his climate crusade, such as his excessive home energy use and his use of private jets to travel the world in order to give his several-thousand-dollar PowerPoint presentation on how WE AMERICANS can cut back to save Earth? Eating a hunk of meat is the least of Al’s contradictions. Of course, there’s also the fact that he’s scientifically wrong about AGW, as are his ridiculous predictions of doom.

Al says the “law must change” when it comes to the climate, and this really gets at the heart of what he’s after. He’s a politician, and politicians need a dire situation—real or imagined—to accumulate power through lawmaking. New laws rarely, if ever, require fewer resources from you—the average American, which means you can plan on opening your wallet up.

Global warming for Al means relevancy and cash (ahem, his carbon credit business). What were some of Al’s previous campaigns requiring governmental action and the wastage of your tax dollars? Stamping out $80 hammers, ozone holes, and obscene pop music lyrics (remember Tipper Gore's PMRC?). Once AGW is a forgotten crusade, he’ll find another cause; crafty politicians always do. Don’t be dumb, America.

FOXNews.com - Pop Tarts: Exclusive: Not So Earth-Friendly? Activists Attack Al Gore - Celebrity Gossip | Entertainment News | Arts And Entertainment:

LOS ANGELES — Look out, Al Gore ... People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals says you are refusing to face one very "inconvenient truth."

On Monday, the animal rights organization launched the campaign offsetalgore.com (conveniently timed for Earth Day) in an attempt to counter the effects that they say the former vice president's meat-laden diet has on Mother Nature.

While reps for Gore had no comment, Pop Tarts confirmed with people who have worked with the ex-veep that he loves his steak and sausage, plus he was notorious for chowing down on the almost all-meat Atkins diet during his run for president.

Global warming | An Inconvenient Truth | Al Gore talks green to The Sun | The Sun |HomePage|News|Special Events|Green Week:

And he warns that while individual efforts such as changing to low-energy lightbulbs are important, it is more significant for world leaders to change laws to stop pollution pouring into the atmosphere and affecting the climate.

Slick Willy: Slow down economy to fight AGW

Bill Clinton stepped in global warming stupidity at a recent campaign speech in CO.

Political Punch:

"And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada -- the rich counties -- would say, 'OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.' We could do that.

This political theme is seen over and over again in the arguments from proponents of AGW: we've got to act now; we've got to save the planet for our grandchildren; we need more government resources (i.e., taxes from you) to fight AGW. You see these themes all the time from politicians who claim this "scientifically sound" policy isn't about politics--it's about saving the planet from you--the ignorant capitalist sheep who've caused all of this. They bitch at you, but they don't want to do anything themselves, so they buy "carbon credits" from companies they own, which is about the stupidest bull crap I've ever seen. If any of you are falling for these shenanigans then you're a dolt.

And these power-seeking politicians claim that scientists, not themselves, are driving the governments of the world to do something about AGW. Except that these particular scientists (those thoroughly onboard with the religion of global warming) need some of your tax dollars in the form of government research grants to make sure that they can remain healthy capitalists (shhhh!). The large number of scientists who denounce the theory of AGW, including some of those originally on the UN's IPCC, are denigrated and called oil company sycophants.

Problem is that there is no problem; the problem is a fart in the wind, literally and figuratively. Those who have power want only one thing more than power--to retain and grow their power. If you're scared that our greenhouse gas emissions are rapidly destroying the planet, you'll need to put them in charge of doing something about it. Then they'll need more revenue to do something about it. Voila! Power consolidation at its sneakiest.

There are mega-problems with the theory of manmade global warming. Dig around and you'll find all you can handle, and it's scientific evidence--not empirical evidence, which is what the news media shoves down your throat all the time. If it's "unusually warm" (whatever that is) the media either blatantly says or clandestinely implies it's manmade global warming; if it's "unusually cold," (again, huh?) they tell you it's driven by manmade climate change (aka global warming). If we have a strong hurricane season, they say we did it with our greenhouse gases; oops...except the hurricane seasons haven't cooperated for the past two years...sorry Gore-Christ, guess you'll need to edit your Oscar-winning movie.

Heavy snow in China strands 150,000??!!

Heavy snow stranding people? How is this possible since our evil gases are melting everything? Oh, that's right...it's no longer called "global warming." Now it's "climate change"...that way, no matter what happens that is unusual (whatever the hell that is) in the weather, we can blame it on ourselves!

Notice the weasel words they use in an attempt to tie all this cold stuff to "climate change." (my emphasis in bold)

Heavy snow in China strands 150,000 - USATODAY.com:

BEIJING (AP) — Power cuts blamed on ice and unusually heavy snowfall left almost 150,000 people waiting for trains in the key southern Chinese rail hub of Guangzhou on Sunday, state media reported.

Hunan and other parts of central China have been hit in recent days by freakishly cold weather, icy rain and snow that has accumulated on power lines, causing them to snap in places. Some areas have seen the heaviest snowfalls in more than a decade, with more bad weather forecast for the coming days.

Of course, how do I see all this? It's not climate change...it's more empirical evidence that the Earth is not heating up. Mother Nature is laughing at us pathetic, arrogant humans.

Deep freeze in upper midwest (with warmth disclaimer)

Of course, Chicagoans are preparing to freeze their tootsies off, and the media must begrudgingly report this fact. But not without placing a disclaimer in the second paragraph about recent warmth.

cbs2chicago.com - B-r-r utal: Upper Midwest Locked In Deep Freeze:

The forecast high for the day in Chicago is a mere 7 degrees, with an overnight low of 3 below zero. But with northwest winds at 20 to 25 mph, the wind chills will make it feel as if it were 20 to 25 below.

Thus far this January, people across the Chicago area have been treated to a warm spell with one day where the mercury reached a shocking 65 degrees. But with the temperatures plummeting beginning last night, Chicagoans have been preparing.

What we have here is an attempt to discredit cold empirical evidence (denoting really cold January temperatures that are normal for Chicago) using warm empirical evidence (that helps denote climate change). [In case you didn't notice the subtle shift, climate change has replaced global warming as the en vogue catch-phrase, which is meant to allow the Enviro-Zealots a way out when the temps cool off, which they know is inevitable.]

So, which empirical evidence is right? The one that supports the religion of global warming/climate change (with Al Gore as messiah), or the one that says it freakin' cold outside--even for January!

Very sly and sneaky...and stupid. People aren't buying into the hysteria, media, no matter how many corkscrew neon light bulbs you turn on to reduce your carbon footprint.

Meanwhile at the National Weather Service, Green Bay is warned of the coming wind chill problems for the weekend:

URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE GREEN BAY WI 244 PM CST SAT JAN 19 2008

...BITTERLY COLD WIND CHILLS EXPECTED THROUGH NOON SUNDAY...

.WIND CHILLS ARE EXPECTED TO AVERAGE AROUND 35 BELOW ZERO THROUGH
SUNDAY MORNING.

Yep, the globe sure is "warming." Please...please...someone bring back the damn global warming!

Where did global warming go?

Br-r-r! Where did global warming go? - The Boston Globe:

THE STARK headline appeared just over a year ago. "2007 to be 'warmest on record,' " BBC News reported on Jan. 4, 2007. Citing experts in the British government's Meteorological Office, the story announced that "the world is likely to experience the warmest year on record in 2007," surpassing the all-time high reached in 1998.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the planetary hot flash: Much of the planet grew bitterly cold.

In South America, for example, the start of winter last year was one of the coldest ever observed. According to Eugenio Hackbart, chief meteorologist of the MetSul Weather Center in Brazil, "a brutal cold wave brought record low temperatures, widespread frost, snow, and major energy disruption." In Buenos Aires, it snowed for the first time in 89 years, while in Peru the cold was so intense that hundreds of people died and the government declared a state of emergency in 14 of the country's 24 provinces. In August, Chile's agriculture minister lamented "the toughest winter we have seen in the past 50 years," which caused losses of at least $200 million in destroyed crops and livestock.

Latin Americans weren't the only ones shivering.

Where indeed!!! Although in the case of Reuters and the AP, you'll be hard-pressed to find an article like this. Bravo Boston Globe for stopping the insanity!