Cap and Tax killer? October was 3rd coldest on record
Yep, the bad news is in for all the folks all worked up about that non-existent phenomenon known as Global Warming. Turns out that once again the settled science shows the earth is cooling. October turned out to be one for the record books.
From NOAA.
National Overview:
* Temperature Highlights – October
* The average October temperature of 50.8°F was 4.0°F below the 20th Century average and ranked as the 3rd coolest based on preliminary data.
* For the nation as a whole, it was the third coolest October on record. The month was marked by an active weather pattern that reinforced unseasonably cold air behind a series of cold fronts. Temperatures were below normal in eight of the nation’s nine climate regions, and of the nine, five were much below normal. Only the Southeast climate region had near normal temperatures for October.
* Statewide temperatures coincided with the regional values as all but six states had below normal temperatures. Oklahoma had its coolest October on record and ten other states had their top five coolest such months.
When the evidence is that the earth has actually been cooling for the past 11 years and polls showing people deserting the Global Warming short bus in droves, makes you wonder when the Warmers will realize they are going the way of the Flat-Earthers.
Related Posts
- Federal Deficit Hits October Record of $176 Billion
- Global Warming Experts: Last Month Was Hottest October Ever (Because We Used September Temperatures)
- Coldest winter in a decade coming?
- Patriot Room Radio #82 – Barry’s October Surprise
- Gallup: Record number of people believe Global Warming is exaggerated
Short URL: http://libertypundits.net/?p=8520




I believe you are confusing weather with long-term Climate changes….
The weather in the United States during a single month which has been attributed to a specific weather patters is not proof of that Global Warming is not occurring.. You have to take air and water temperature trends over a long period of time to make this assertion.
And if you follow the links, you get to this pesky graph, which shows the decline back to the average forming for the past few years.
We all know the issue at the heart of the matter: CO2 ppm. The issue is, as finite as possible, the effect of an increasing rate. Warmists want 350. We see 400 coming. The C&T legislation has damn-near martial law declarations if 450 is reached.
The problem is that Warmists declare the environment to be a closed system, and that adjusting this single variable with have a single effect. That is where the fundamental disagreement lies. The environment adapts. Always has. Remember the “ozone hole is gonna make the Southern Hemisphere unlivable in ten years” claims made 30 years ago? Further, we all know that the overwhelming majority of CO2, well above 90%, is naturally occurring. Man’s activities have nothing to do with it.
The issue then returns to man-made CO2, and to committing trillions of dollars to managing it. When the Warmists stop the religious devotion to their version of the facts, then maybe a discussion can begin. Tell me, why did the House reject an amendment to Waxman-Markey that stated simply, all research used as a basis for policy must be peer-reviewed?
The NOAA graph:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2008/dec/Reg110Dv00Elem02_01122008_pg.gif
The earth has been cooling for the past 11 years. Is that the kind of trend you mean?
Or are you arguing that as the world gets cooler, we should still try to curb greenhouse gases, to make it even colder?
If your thing is climate-change (I have decided to not let the Warmers move the goal-posts in the middle of the game by changing from global warming to climate change, so I call it by the original, liberal name of Global Warming), which, I assume, means that any change in the earth’s temperature, either up or down, is a bad thing, then how do you propose to counter global-cooling?
ROFLOL