Reply With Quote
Wait... it's hot in the summer in Brazil?
Who would have thought?
By MARCO SIBAJA (AP) – 5 days ago
BRASILIA, Brazil — Thirty-two elderly people died in a southeastern Brazilian city this week because of a heat wave that has pushed temperatures to unseasonably high levels, a health official said Wednesday.
All of the fatalities in the coastal city of Santos near Sao Paulo involved people between 60 and 90 years old with pre-existing conditions such as diabetes or hypertension, according to the health ministry in Santos.
The first deaths were registered Monday, when the temperature in Santos reached 39 degrees Celsius (102 Fahrenheit). Temperatures were well above 30 degrees (86 F) in the following days.
Luiz Fernando Gomes da Silva, Santos' health ministry's coordinator for the elderly, is urging people to drink a lot of liquids amid the heat of the South American summer.
Temperatures are also hitting record levels in Rio de Janeiro, where the city's five-day Carnival bash begins Friday.
The heat wave follows more than a month of torrential rains across southeastern Brazil that killed more than 70 people — most victims of mudslides that swept away ramshackle homes built on hillsides.
Wait... it's hot in the summer in Brazil?
Who would have thought?
But, but, it is snowing up here. How can this be?
It must be cold everywhere, right?
It's not that complicated, really...
it's winter here, it's summer there...
But, the fact that snow exists at all must be a complete repudiation of that "global warming" thing we keep hearin' about from them pesky scientist types.
Next thing you know, the sun will go away and the world will go dark. Pshaw. It's light outside now, so that just puts the whole "night" myth to rest. Pfft.
What global warming?
I mean, if you're tying to point out that it's really hot in the summer in Brazil as some kind of 'unusual' or 'non-historical' event, you have failed miserably...
I would actually take you a little more seriously if you would show me a pattern of higher historical temperatures in Brazil during winter...
Also, how does these temperatures compare historically? I mean, 39 degrees celsius is pretty common for January and February over there...
It's been ing hot in Argentina too . . .
First of all are these guys even all alive? If they are then where did they get the money to all go to Brazil? They haven't had a hit in decades.
Secondly, aren't they elderly as well? Why would they kill old people when they are old?
lol. It's not often that opening the political forum makes my morning. Well done RG.
No actually.
My point was to point out how silly a lot of global climate change deniers are when they try to use isolated events of cold weather to somehow "disprove" the whole notion of human-caused climate change, as DarrinS does on a regular basis.
It is a perfect example of a strawman logical fallacy. Isolated heat waves no more prove global climate change than isolated snow storms disprove it.
No, just quid pro quo. AGW advocates use isolated events to "prove" AGW.
Example:
See, you can't have it both ways.
It is a perfect example of a strawman logical fallacy. Isolated heat waves no more prove global climate change than isolated snow storms disprove it.
Yes. You are correct.
So, are you saying AGW is not a settled science?
You see, I still believe climate change should be studied. I just don't think we fully understand all of the factors that affect global climate. I just want the IPCC to be disbanded and for some independent, NON-governmental body to take up the study. It is FAR too politicized.
You mean you're lowering yourself to their standards to 'raise the bar' on the discussion? Sounds pretty weak to me.
It is weak. That is the point.
Warmers...
I find it intellectually dishonest to use one weather pattern to deny global warming exists. I leave that to armchair climatologists/talk radio crowd. RG I doubt they get what you are proving.
Thanks for nothing... I guess...
Indeed we don't understand all of the factors.
Which is one of the main reasons why we should seriously consider not tripling the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
As for the IPCC being politicized:
I doubt you would find any body studying this acceptable. You seem to have taken all the evidence supporting this and lumped it in to "they just say that because it is in their interest to say that", a weak form of ad hominem, and little better than the cries of "government shill" that one hears from the 9-11 nutters. If this is unfair, then give me some bit of evidence supporting the man-caused climate change that you think appears valid.
As I have said before, there is enough data out there to show something is happening. It is entirely reasonable to make a good guess as to the causes, and take some steps to mitigate them before it is too late.
Not only is it reasonable, but it would highly likely be good for our economy in the long-term to do so.
Actually, I got Darrin to admit that was precisely what *he* was doing.
That is something.
Maybe now we can move beyond something everybody knows really doesn't prove anything.
I must strongly disagree with you here.
It is silly when either side does it.
So why do you keep doing it?
If we don't, then it's not "settled", right?
It's very insulting to equate skeptics to 9-11 nutters. You must think a lot of very famous scientists, including Nobel Prize winners (in physics -- not peace), are crazer flat-Earth nutters too.
I actually used to believe in AGW until I saw Inconvenient Truth. People don't realize that the apocalyptic flood animations in that horror flick are 12 times worse than the IPCC's worst case scenarios.
Look, the only evidence I can give is anecdotal. Retreating glaciers, a stranded polar bear on a piece of ice, etc. I don't know of any evidence that links the warming to CO2. If you have some, please share. CO2 has gone up consistently and linearly since 1998 and yet the global avg temps are flat.
So, you want to re-engineer world economies based on a guess? Not good enough.
Not only is it reasonable, but it would highly likely be good for our economy in the long-term to do so.
Perhaps, but potentially disasterous in the short-term. By short, I mean 10-20 years, maybe longer.
By the way, RG, I'm all for doing things to mitigate any negative affects people are having on the climate, so long as it's not a suicide pact.
I was thinking the same thing, but I haven't been there. I know when I lived in The Dalles, OR, we had one summer that hit 122 F (50 C), and we are north of 45 degrees la ude, Not near the equator.
Oh... that was also in the 70's, during the global cooling scare!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
