Cavuto caption: "Nation in a Deep Freeze: What Global Warming?"
A segment on global warming on the January 17 edition of Fox News' Your World featured on-screen graphics that read: "Global Warming?" and "Nation in a Deep Freeze: What Global Warming?" Host Neil Cavuto began the segment by noting freezing temperatures in Texas, Arizona, and California and asking if these temperatures were "[p]roof that all this hype over global warming could be just that -- hype?"
As Media Matters for America has noted, weather in a portion of the United States is not indicative of whether the Earth is warming. As the National Climatic Data Center noted in its preliminary 2006 report, "[f]ollowing the warmest year on record for the globe in 2005, the annual global temperature for 2006 is expected to be sixth warmest since recordkeeping began in 1880." That report also noted that "the 2006 annual average temperature for the contiguous United States (based on preliminary data) will likely be 2 [degrees] F (1.1 [degrees] C) above the 20th Century mean, which would make 2006 the third warmest year on record."
The Your World segment featured commentary by Forbes editor in chief and former Republican presidential hopeful Steve Forbes, Forbes on Fox commentator Michele Steele, and Forbes Silicon Valley bureau chief Quentin Hardy.
From the January 17 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:
CAVUTO: Twenty-four degrees in Fresno, 29 degrees in Phoenix, down to 9 degrees in Amarillo, Texas, and on and on. It is some of the coldest air in this part of the country in 20 years. Proof that all of this hype over global warming could be just that -- hype?
Here we have the question mark being used excessively (for those of you who have not seen it, find the Daily Show segment about the overuse of this particular punctuation). It is apparently now OK to say anything, as long as it is in the form of a question. Look at Fox. They'll tag anything up on their screens as long as it has a question mark after it.
Funny, before it got cold in NC this week, it was 76 degrees last Sunday, and in the high 60's and 70's for weeks before that.
Cavuto is an idiot methinks.
There is no snow in Moscow.
we've just come off of a four day shutdown because of several inches of ice and snow. The weather is changing drastically all over the world, but all these clowns can do is assume global warming means it's friggin hot. They can't wrap their little noggins around the fact that the hot will be preceeded by major climate changes.
...according to everything I have read on global warming part of it is having severe and unusual weather, like the freeze in California or how about the hurricane strength storm hitting part of Europe right now. Or the flowers blooming in DC and on and on.
This is exactly what is to be expected according to those people called ....scientists.
Cavuto is appealing to the rubes and dupes who will fall for his lying and misleading people.
The climate change deniers have been praying for some cold weather for some time now. Fox news has to make the most of it while they can. They need so sell those 400 hp SUVs. I guess there will always be some idiots to watch Fox, the only network to defend America from the S-Ps.
Not a question mark. Call it cavuto mark.
Here, Jon Stewart's show Question Mark
Of course he is not saying that global warming does not exist. He is just questinging.
CAVUTO: Proof that all of this hype over global warming could be just that -- hype?
No, Neal, as you would know if you had even the slightest grasp of the issue.
...And so are my viewers."
It's called GLOBAL Warming - not Anecdotal temperatures on winter days warming.
leatherhelmet in a post below claims there is no global warming because no hurricanes hit the u. s. coastline. but 2006 was an el nino year, and when that current forms in the pacific it gives us exactly what we got this year. there was a normal number of hurricanes even though an el nino normally greatly reduces the number. but in the pacific this year, from wunderground.com: "hurricane ioke was the strongest hurricane ever recorded in the central pacific, and remained at category 4 or 5 strength longer than any tropical cyclone on record." "monica was the most intense cyclone ever observed in the southern hemisphere, which is remarkable given that she formed in the last half of april, when the australian cyclone season is typically over." "australia got hit exceptionally hard by three major tropical cyclones in 2006." "the 2006 season saw an unprecented five major [cat. 3 or higher] typhoons make landfall in the philippines, plus one cat. 2." time for a new right wing talking point.
Is going on regardless of the temperatures today. Its a slow process. We are all doomed .
Any reference to "Global" or "The World" shall hereby only be referring to The United States of America...since we are the only country that really counts anyway.
Seriously, it's amazing to me that we haven't seen a Fox&Friends episode where the hosts look out of that big window that overlooks 5th Ave in NYC and say: Genocide? What Genocide? After a report on Darfur.
Cavuto knows his audience well... gullible fools.
the record number of hurricanes proved man caused Global Warming. Of course we had zero hurricanes in the U.S. last year, but let's skip that little detail for the moment.
So Al Gore does NOT agree with Media Matters assessment that whether in certain regions is an indicator of Global Warming.
the EVIDENCE is WARMEST YEARS on record, MELTING ICECAPS, EMISSIONS of CO2, duh....
I sure am glad I have my Illegal smog hookup in L.A. California has become the Smog Nazi State. You can not build a fast car, but you can buy one. Its all about the money. Wonder where the money trail leads on Global Warming?
Straight to Exxon/Mobile....
But I would like to know where it goes to in the "Other Direction".
Why don't you poor some recently melted glacial ice water over your head to cool off.
I would have thought you would understand global warming. Its kind of like your obsession with illegal aliens and muslims: Add some illegals to the mix and everything goes out of wack and our civilization crumbles. Replace CO2 with illegals and there you have it. The only difference, EL, is that human society can be flexible and adjust to change. The global climate cannot. That's why climatologist refer to CO2 as having a "forcing" effect on climate. The climate has no option for tolerance once the thresholds are breached.
You seem so worried about preserving our non negotable but somehow incredibly fragil way off life yet you total overlook the real threats that really imperil our civilization. Think about it EL, shifting climate zones will imply shifting populations and all those people who supposedly will destroy our civilization live down south in the warm zones. I'd much rather deal with demographic change than climate change.
EL, Our way of life is poison. We need to progress to a more advanced modern lifestyle and economy. Otherwise we are just peeing in the pool.
that cold snap destroyed like 70% of the citrus crop. Now there are way less of those jobs that americans won't do which translates into less illegal mexicans.
The real scary thing about our little CO2 experiment is that it is happening in the middle of a global population explosion. Look it up! Within my lifetime there was less than 3 billion people in the entire planet. Now there is 6.5 billion and every second of every day we break the all time record. Within this half of the century we should be at around 10 billion. That means we will add a 1950's planet worth of people in the next 50 years on top of what we have now. Many of these added people will be from the developing nations. I wonder if sunny skies and gentle spring showers will be there to greet them?
It is real clever for Fox to make hay out of this cold snap. Its quite funny isn't it? Meanwhile the real story is that we will have a lot more mouths to feed during a period of climate instability. So our bad citrus harvest makes quite an ironic impact on the debate, doesn't it?
Our climate is naturally turbulent. We are pouring gas on the fire at a time when we realy need reliable conditions. There is no fence that can keep out bad climate. No Minutemen that can keep the crops growing. No outsiders to point the finger at.
but I sure thought Gore was careful to qualify his comments about possible links between the hurricanes and the warming. Anybody have access to the DVD who can check on that?
There is an excellent site addressing the contingency of this and other weather extremes, noting which problems are very likely and over what areas they may be expected, and which are "likely in some areas" with varying degrees of data available impacting the probability of correctness. See the comprehesive site but start at [link to www.grida.no]
but I sure thought Gore was careful to qualify his comments about possible links between the hurricanes and the warming. Anybody have access to the DVD who can check on that?
There is an excellent site addressing the contingency of this and other weather extremes, noting which problems are very likely and over what areas they may be expected, and which are "likely in some areas" with varying degrees of data available impacting the probability of correctness. See the comprehesive site but start at [link to www.grida.no]
Where is the solid evidence? You will not convince people until there is some PROOF of EVIDENCE. Sad? But True?
Yeah, but note that he's talking ONLY about the link between hurricanes and warming, not whether warming is occurring. Nobody really disputes that anymore - even Bush has admitted that the earth is warming. Which makes Cavuto look even more ridiculous.
Are you asking? Or telling? Or typing in, like, a Valley Girl accent?
If you could explain to me how you think one could show "evidence" of a projected future event, it might be helpful.
You answered it. if, iF , IF
Unlike religious fanatics who will tell you that what they believe is 100%...with certainty. Science is about the odds. There is never 100%. But, you go with the majority opinion and the most plausible explanation. Neil's (and every other nutjob who balks at science) is basing their opinions on flawed or non-existent logic.
If you don't grasp the concepts, read about them or ask someone who does.
The climatologist stated:
1) Global warming is absolutely occuring.
2) The change in the polar ice cap is reliable evidence of that.
3) Linking other current weather events, e.g., recent winter storms, to global warming is bad science. Such assertions can be reliably made only with a historical perspective.
4) By then, it will be too late.
Here are some items to read, leather
Canadian ice, January 4, 2007 [link to www.cnn.com]
General weather/planet condition (2006) [link to www.time.com]
If you want I have more.
Ah, the local member of the Flat Earth Society weighs in. How are those membership numbers lately?
Isn't there some way to throw you IDIOTS off our planet?
See the freaking movie, lh. If not for yourself, then your children. Educate yourself, please. Seriously.
This affects ALL of us on this spaceship we know as Earth: R, D, I, blue, purple, black, white, red, yellow, pick a pigeonhole that suits you.
Get a damn clue, or get off my planet.
Bush or Chenney favor fawning Cavuto with a little mutual admiration society interviewing again.
Fox news and Exxon/Mobil...sleeping together?...I report, you decide...
Where were you last weekend? It was almost 60 degrees on the East Coast. Some areas were in the seventies. Yesterday was the first cold day this winter. This years first snow flake fell in Central Park last week. That's the latest first snow since they've been keeping records.
"Proof that all of this hype over global warming could be just that -- hype?"
Anytime, anyone uses the words "proof" and "could" in the same sentence, it only shows the person to be an idiot.
on January 6 and it was 72 degrees. Everybody was walking around the city in t-shirts and shorts. Great potential video footage.
Did Neil run a show the next Monday saying "is Global Warming for real"? Methinks not.
What's irking me lately are all of the weather reporters who were so freaking happy that the temps in the northern states were 20-30 degrees higher than average. Yah, trees and flowers blooming in January is a good thing. Right.
If it's possible that such warm temps are a sign of impending doom, is this something to be happy about ?
of the coin. We in cali have had record low temps.
...not simple warming, that is indicated by the research.
Globally, average temperatures will rise - but it will not be like turning up a big, planet-sized thermostat. Winters may, in fact, be colder in places. One of the most dangeous elements of climate change is that there is no way of predicting all the effects.
Even if the research indicated that the world would uniformly get the climate of, say, Santa Monica, it would be of the utmost importance to do everything in our power to stop it.
For one thing, I like peaches...
peaches as well.
This is what happens when the argument is focused on a difficult to verify effect (climate change), as opposed to the indisputable and impossible-to-argue-with cause: Emissions...
Fossil fuel emissions, petroleum combustion by-products, carbon-based emissions...
...call them what you will, they should always remain the focus of the argument: Emissions, and the Regulatory control of them.
The industry that fights against the Health and Public Safety Regulation of those emissions (the petroleum and automobile industries), they love it when they can defelect the argument away from that word, EMISSIONS, as the cause, and toward a much harder to prove (and more vague in description and imagination) effect, climate change.
The part of our National (and State) Policy that this Health and Public Safety issue affects is that of REGULATION of EMISSIONS...
...it's best to stay focused always on that part of the argument, on the cause: Emissions.
That's what California is doing, focusing on the Regulation of Emissions...
...those are the words that those industries, petroleum and automobiles (which don't care nearly as much about Health and Public Safety, as they do about revenues and profits and Regulations)...
...those are the words that they fear: REGULATION of EMISSIONS...
...not climate change.
There appears today in the NY Times online, an article titled "A Coalition for Firm Limit on Emissions"
[link to www.nytimes.com]
The formal name of the coalition is United States Climate Action Partnership, and it is comprised of representatives (CEOs mostly, it seems) from ten companies whose operations are considered as contributing to the "emissions problem".
What they have been doing is meeting to reach a consensus among themselves, as to what they can recommend to be levels of emissions control that they can meet without excessive impact on their businesses... and these recommendations are meant to be considered by our Congress, when they take up this very important issue of emissions control, by way of Federal Regulation... and they, the coalition, will be announcing these recommended levels of reduced emissions next Monday.
The article has these lines, as excerpts:
"The diversity of the coalition ...could send a strong signal that businesses want to get ahead of the increasing political momentum for federal emissions controls, in part to ensure that their long-term interests are protected."
"[some] worry that harsher measures, like a stiff tax on fossil fuels, the biggest contributor to global-warming gases, could be imposed if they do not reach a consensus on a legislative approach."
"The negotiations, conducted primarily by the chief executives of the companies, did not produce a model piece of legislation, but rather a detailed set of principles that they suggest as a guide to any legislation. In the Senate, there are already four Democratic proposals for limiting carbon emissions and creating a market-based system, under which the government gives or sells permits to businesses, allowing them a certain level of emissions."
And much more of interest... and I post this here to point out, that whatever comes from the recommendations of this primarily-industrial coalition, whether anything substantial or not, at least what's being addressed here is the truly important substance of the issue: Emissions, and the control and Regulation of them...
...as opposed to what seems to me a sometimes fruitless argument about "global warming" and "climate change"... an unending debate about the weather, that can sound a little like some of the argument on this comments thread (which even descended to arguing about hurricaines)...
...which is an argument that ultimately, by it's tiresome conclusion, has not resulted in any positive move to reduce emissions... an argument that may even neglect to address the subject of emissions entirely!
Which is the point of this post, and the one I made above: Not to stray too far from the cause, emissions (and in the process neglect to address the Regulation thereof), by debating too greatly the effect of "global warming" and "climate change"...
...and to see such a debate go on endlessly, with charges of false being tirelessly answered with charges of true...
...and all the time we go, so destructively, without the positive proposals of emissions control and Regulation... without even those words getting said!
It's a matter too important to see tabled by endless debate.
It's a matter of Health and Public Safety, emissions and the Regulation of them...
...were they to turn out to have little or nothing to do with "warming" or "change", it would not lessen their TOXICITY and HAZARD and THREAT to our Health and Public Safety... not one bit.
There is a huge headline on drudgereport declaring Pelosi's intent to create a global warming panel, juxtaposed with a photo of some frozen oranges.
I don't know if the people at drudgereport are so stupid, or if they just assume that their repooplikan reader base is.
Little from column A, a little from column B
Willard Scott.
I dunno how them southern states are doing, but here in Canada it has been unseasonably warm. It wasn't until this week that my province finally got a snowfall that stuck around for a whole day.
bossfoxx8748, the republicans would say, "you're a Canadian what do you know about cold weather and you're probably an illegal alien as well!!!!"
"but here in Canada it has been unseasonably warm. "
Here in Michigan, we also just had our first real snow storm, that is lasting over a day. My sister moved to Denver this fall, haha. I wanted to send her some pictures of the green grass and kids running around in shorts on Christmas day.
In fact the wild roses in my back yard bloomed and the spring crocuses (sp?) came out around New Years day.
. . .and cherry blossoms in nyc. in january.
It's GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE, you monkey in a suit.
Typical Rethug/neocon/flat-earther. "Ifn' it ain't a gittin' warmer, then there ain't nuffin' ta worry 'bout."
JFC man- isn't there a way we can evict these morons off our planet?
...they just can't be allowed to make the decision any more. Somebody drives drunk twice, they take away the keys. How many DWIs (Dictating While Ignorant) will these guys get?