START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good

4 People Who Think Snow Disproves Global Warming

4 People Who Think Snow Disproves Global Warming

Hopefully this isn’t news to too many people, but snowstorms do not disprove climate change.

“As the Earth gets warmer and more moisture gets absorbed into the atmosphere, we are steadily loading the dice in favor of more extreme storms in all seasons, capable of causing greater impacts on society,” says scientist Jeff Masters. “If the climate continues to warm, we should expect an increase in heavy snow events for a few decades, until the climate grows so warm that we pass the point where it’s too warm for it to snow heavily.”

Okay, that’s a scientist’s perspective. Maybe you’d prefer to hear politicians’ and pundits’ anecdotal experience instead? Here are four notable figures who will have you believe that just because temperatures haven’t stopped going above freezing altogether that global warming must be a hoax:

1. Donald Trump

Leave it to Donald Trump to kill the joy of a new year. On January 1st, Trump tweeted, “This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bulls*** has got to stop. Our planet is freezing, record low temps, and our GW scientists are stuck in ice.”

How dare environmentalists interfere with the rich’s ability to make more money! (Why is it only considered “expensive” when it’s a detriment to businesses that can afford it?) Call off the activists because it’s cold!

As for the scientists stuck in the ice, they didn’t exactly freeze into place. Science writer Chris Mooney explains that they got trapped after ice broke off from a glacier — the result of climate change.

2. Sarah Palin

“Global warming my gluteus maximus,” Sarah Palin wrote on her Facebook page. This comment was attached to a photo of her child playing in the snow. Most Alaskans wouldn’t assume that snow had to disappear from their state altogether and abruptly for global warming to be valid, but most Alaskans also aren’t the former Governor, I suppose.

That, or it’s a talking point that Palin is milking for effect. The year before, Palin posted a picture of a different child in sub-zero temperature and similarly asked, “What global warming?” Funny how she didn’t make a similar point during the state’s record warm streak that year.

3. Jim DeMint

A few years ago, then South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint tweeted a similar sentiment:  ”It’s going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries ‘uncle’.” Get it? Surely the former Vice President will be forced to admit his global warming platform is a charade now that a foot of snow is on the ground!

Fortunately, Gore hasn’t given up his environmental crusade. As for DeMint, after serving in Congress for 14 years, he resigned last year to head The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that will allow him to continue sharing his climate skepticism.

4. Rush Limbaugh

Shock jock Rush Limbaugh weighed in on the recent cold weather surge with a slam of his own. On his show, he said, “I would love to see Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and Hillary sitting outside on the 50 yard line of Green Bay the whole game, and then afterwards do a presentation for us all on global warming.”

As Mother Jones points out, the winter in Wisconsin is not indicative of the weather elsewhere. In the Southern Hemisphere, currently experiencing its summer, the temperature is hovering around 120 degrees Farenheit in Australia.

Read more: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it


+ add your own
2:30PM PST on Nov 3, 2014

thanks for sharing :)

10:09AM PST on Feb 4, 2014


12:53PM PST on Jan 15, 2014

Yes, there are those promoting breeding for their own benefit. However, fewer and fewer people are listening. Regarding the U.S.: yes, there was the baby boomer era, which increased the birth rate. However, much of this was a rebound from the depression/ war years. The birth rate was even higher at the turn of the 20th century.
While recent trends could accelerate or reverse (I do not have a crystal ball), all indications point to a continuing decrease. This would still result in a population increase for the immediate future. After all, population has increased since the end of the plague. However, at some time this century, the birth rate is expected to equal the death rate. Whether we start to see a decline in population is somewhat speculative, but not unexpected. This does not take into account any massive disaster that could claim untold lives, hastening the decline.
Don't get MD wrong, population has grown out of control. But it appears to be stabilizing.

6:40PM PST on Jan 14, 2014

The “decrease” of birth rates since the 60’s is only relative to the unusual rise during the baby boom. What it dropped down to in the late 60’s is still much higher than the pre-war numbers. (The baby boom was just an unusual occurrence during a steady upward trend, which made the illusion of a subsequent drop). Even if birth rates finally show signs of slowing down now, it’s not putting a dent in the population due to the various reasons you mentioned, plus the decrease in infant mortality.

Regardless of the reasons, the only direction the US population (and the world population) has gone is UP.
The predicted stabilization/decline is based on the assumption that birth rates would continue to fall, i.e. More & more people would voluntarily have few or no children, thereby balancing out the actions of excessive breeders.

This assumption may well be wrong, considering that much of the world is dominated by religious nuts who dictate people should keep breeding; big business who want more & more consumers to buy what they sell; and gullible people who are easily swayed by propaganda.

10:24AM PST on Jan 13, 2014

The population increase in the U.S. is largely due to immigration. The birthrate in the U.S. is 2.1 childre / women, which is just slightly above the replacement value (2.0). See the following articles about the changing birth rates (a.k.a. fertility rates) worldwide, which peaked in the 1960s, and have fallen since. The other factor in population increase is longetivy. Most of those born in the high birth rate years, and still living. In the coming decades, they will begin to die off in much larger numbers. Coupled with the declining birth rate, we could see a population maximum by 2050. That is based on current trends, others have it later, but it could occur earlier. A 0.1% change in fertility rate makes a huge difference over a decade or two.

7:30AM PST on Jan 13, 2014

Anji T.,
Agreed. Short-term weather conditions neither prove nor disprove global warming. There are those who claim that the U.S. heat wave of 2012 and Russian heat wave of 2010 were the result of global warming. Similarly, there are those who claim that the recent cold snap in the U.S. or the cold winter last year in Europe disprove global warming. This is not limited to temperatures. Some claimed the Oklahoma tornado this year was caused by global warming, while others claim that the record low tornado occurrance in 2013 show that global warming is not occurring. Similarly, some claimed global warming caused hurricane Sandy, while others point to the low hurricane activity of the past few years as proof that it is not occurring.

People are selectively choosing their data to prove their point, and ignoring that which does not. Overall temperatures have increased sinusoidally since 1880, at an annual rate of ~0.6C/century. This has led to some periods of greater increase (1990s) and periods of less (2000s). These short-term variations do not support long-term acceleration or deceleration. Tornadic activity has decreased as the planet has warmed, as expected due to the decrease in temperature gradient from the tropics to the poles. Tropical cyclonic activity has shown no overall trend as the planet has warmed, and hurricane experts are divided over future changes in a warming world (while warmer seas could lead to a greater occurrance of cylconic activity, the s

7:13AM PST on Jan 13, 2014

“The U.S. birth rate had fallen by half over the past 50 years. The same is true in…..”

In that case, birth rates cannot be good indicators of population, considering the POPULATION rose steadily in these countries.

While African countries certainly have huge birth rates, maybe they don’t contribute to the population that much, considering infant/childhood mortality rates are also very high.
Furthermore, I am sure their energy consumption per capita is far less than the US & China etc. The real problem is not with them but the larger countries with huge population and greater energy consumption.

If the spontaneous decrease in birth rate didn’t put a dent in population, it needs to be addressed in others ways, i.e. active efforts to decrease birth rate further. The US is doing the opposite, i.e. providing incentives to breeders while penalizing non-breeders.

5:02AM PST on Jan 13, 2014

Be careful, weather does not equate to climate. Weather can change over the short term, but the climate could remain the same. That is what we have experienced so far.

5:48PM PST on Jan 12, 2014

What a group that is!

4:20PM PST on Jan 12, 2014

refuse to believe in global warming=climate change jackasses!

add your comment

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Care2 - Be Extraordinary - Start a Care2 Petition
ads keep care2 free

Recent Comments from Causes

very, very important and good information! thank you!!

It is too bad that he didn't live to see this. A bittersweet honor indeed.

ads keep care2 free

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.