"What happened to global warming?" asks a headline at the BBC.
Folks in the Rockies are shivering. "Western Montana breaks records," says a report. Missoula reported a low of 8 degrees yesterday...14 degrees lower than the previous record for this early in the season.
Nearby Idaho had heavy snow last week too. Same thing in New Zealand, where roads were blocked by heavy snow.
In New Zealand, two major North Island highways remain closed after unseasonal heavy snow days stranded motorists for two nights. "Even if this was the middle of winter this is extreme," said an analyst.
And right now, it's spring in NZ. They had a spring snowstorm that put their winter snowstorms to shame.
"Forget global warming," says old friend Jim Davidson. "Get ready for another ice age." Buy Brazil, he advises; the cold will drive down farm output in North America and Europe.
As the BBC reports, worldwide temperatures are not increasing; they've been falling for the last 10 years. No one knows why. Global warming enthusiasts say the trend is still towards higher temperatures. Their opponents say the world is actually beginning a major period of cooling - driven by solar activity, not by man-made carbon emissions.
Who's right? We get out our mittens and wait to find out.
Until tomorrow,
Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning Australia
P.S. to get The Daily Reckoning direct to your inbox sign up to our free e-mail newsletter or if you prefer to use RSS, subscribe to the Daily Reckoning RSS feed.
Related Articles:
- Salt vs. Snowflakes
- Global Warming Getting Bad Press
- Expect the Great Correction to Wipe Out this Bounce
- An Old Friend With a New Idea on Global Warming
- Here Comes More Snow!
About the Author
Best-selling investment author Bill Bonner is the founder and president of Agora Publishing, one of the world's most successful consumer newsletter companies. Owner of both Fleet Street Publications and MoneyWeek magazine in the UK, he is also author of the free daily e-mail The Daily Reckoning.
Comment by Dan on 14 October 2009:
Whatever the weather does, they will find a way to tax us for it.
Comment by Lachlan Scanlan on 14 October 2009:
Yep. Its just a waste of time pulling our hair out over global warming and CO2 taxes because if big gov. wants a tax then a tax they will get. The weather patterns themselves will show us the fraud of AGW anyhow.
Comment by Drang on 14 October 2009:
You really are quite ignorant about this subject aren't you? Please refer here and avoid commentary until you've familiarised yourself with the science: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/10/a-warming-pause/
Comment by Dan on 15 October 2009:
Interesting link, Drang. The debate in the comments below the article reveal a whole lot about how much belief and pride plays a role in science - like in religion, people on all sides are fighting for their personal truth, with all the name calling (eg: denialists, sceptics) and lip pouting. The weight of evidence is there, but people still disagree bitterly over which data to interpret and how much credence to give to various trends. There is obviously a fair bit of disinformation about regarding global warming - after all, politicians talk about it.
Very few people I've met argue against measures which improve energy efficiency and reduce effluent production. There are many benefits in alternative fuels, solar/wind energy, improved transportation, etc, besides CO2 emissions reductions. These continue to exist regardless of what global temperatures do. That is the common ground people should be emphasizing. The rest currently has to do with imposing a carbon tax / monetizing carbon emissions, which is an economic phenomenon that may in the end do absolutely nothing for the environment. People rightly suspect that kind of measure because there is so much money in it.
Comment by Anonymous on 15 October 2009:
The fact the climate is changing in the absolute opposite to what is being claimed has is no reason not to impose a new tax .
There has been a lot of money poured into "Global Warming" and the investors don't want to lose, so they re-brand it as "Climate Change".
They are going to generate a whole new industry, and expect us to pay for it.
Stimulus.
Comment by Justin on 15 October 2009:
The road to Charlotte's Pass is closed again too! With snow!
Comment by Fred on 15 October 2009:
What the world needs is a better understanding of the mechanics of propaganda, logical fallacies, mass hysteria and PR. Tony Jones on the ABC seems to be one of the governments main tools.
Comment by alan wecker on 16 October 2009:
scientists who study cycles contend that there is a 40000 year cycle in the worlds weather pattern---covering ice age to hot and back to ice age again. as the last ice age ended 12000 years ago it makes sense that the planet is warming up at this time --and there were no cars 12000 years ago !! the paranoia is simply greenies being greenies---and pollies being pollies
Comment by Tim on 18 October 2009:
Bill.
Suggest you stick to finance (which you're good at).
Climate (which weather is a subset of, not definitive of), is not your forte.
Weather: "OH NOZE!! IT'S SNOWING!!! THOSE FILTHY SCIENTISTS (THOSE ONE'S WITH THOSE PHDS AND PEER REVIEWING) ARE SO WRONG LOLZ. OMG ITS A CONSPIRACY ONEONEONEONSHIFTHHIFT111111. ANDREW BOLT IS RIGHT!!11111oneoneshift
If you care to actually look, you'll see you're very, very, VERY wrong.
I agree with your finance lilt, your climate position is one of incorrect basis. Leave climate to the climate scientists. You don't see them traipsing around in finance claiming this and that, and everything you say is wrong.
Cheers
Tim
heresysnowboarding.com
Comment by Richo on 8 December 2009:
Have to agree with Tim here.
I am going to stop visiting this site because I'm pissed off about yet another bunch of Journo's and Financial experts, who are embarassingly ignorant and ill informed about scientific matters, offering opinions and spreading misinformation about climate change.
I don't like the idea of higher electricity bills and the economic costs, but still I'm mature enough to look at the climate change situation objectively.