Here's something for this observation too - http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-global-snowstorms-scientists.html
As a counterpoint for anecdotal evidence, you may want to read the news stories about record heatwaves through the US over the past month...
Yeah this is nice. If the weather is warmer, it's because of global warming. If it gets colder it's also global warming. You guys are hilarious. Any kind of evidence, either warmer or cooler somehow manages to support your hypothesis. You can't really expect me to take you seriously if this is your line of argument.
Of course not, but as many people have observed, a statistical correlation is often Ma Nature's way of saying "Hey, look over here; there's something going on that may be important to you."
Yeah, and just as often, it isn't. All you have is correlation. Maybe sunspots are driving both variables up and neither one causes the other. Maybe it's pixies dancing. This isn't science and after recent revelations in the wake of Climate-gate, neither is "Climate Science". It's Climate Shamanism or Climate Theology. Take your pick. You can no longer take at face value any proclamations coming from "climate scientists". I've had more reliable predictions from horoscopes so forgive me if I file this latest piece of alarmism in same category..
The ability to trust any reports from the IPCC or CRU is gone, and scientists are going to need years to rebuild that trust.
We have more than a mere correlation between carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and temperature rise.
No actually that is all you have. There's plenty of historical evidence to indicate that temperature rise leads the atmospheric CO2 increase. The mechanism by which CO2 is theorised to retain heat is poorly understood and far from proven. Water vapour has a far higher heat capacity to act as a greenhouse gas and yet isn't accounted for in most of the models,
The consequences on the global economy of attempting to remove carbon from our daily lives will dramatically impact the livelyhood of billions of people who will face hardship, poverty and hunger because of the increased costs of energy. You have the bare faced gall to quote economic impact about removing carbon dioxide just so a few beach-front properties avoid a miniscule risk of higher sea levels.
Finally, I'm sitting here looking out the window watching it snow for the first time in ~70 years and have to seriously question your assumptions that the planet is even warming at all.
Does slashdot even have editors anymore?
Yes, but they seem to think global warming is fiction.
Ah good. The editors are right. CAGW is fiction.
if an approval by NASA isn't good enough, I don't know what will be.
This is known as an "appeal to authority". The case for science will stand on its own irrespective of who is stating it. NASA has no more authority to spout the "truth" than Joe Sixpack.
Here's a clue: Would you trust NASA to land a probe on Mars 100% of the time, or return a Shuttle crew to earth 100% of the time simply because "shucks, they're NASA. They know their shit."
Guess what. NASA makes mistakes. Their scientists are human and are driven by the same failings and weaknesses as the rest of us. If you want an alernative perspective, try googling "Judith Curry" for an example of a real scientist who holds a different view.
Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten