One of the few projects I was involved in during my military career that I can talk about was the "Weather War" study. The Pentagon seriously considered purposely altering weather as a means of gaining the edge on opponents. The idea of being able to create a storm to impede troop movements, or even causing dense fog to mask amphibious landings was part of the study. More ambitious plans looked at artificially generated tornadoes as weapons.
The reality of how little humans could do to alter weather events quickly set in. Starting with the "nuclear Winter" studies, the numbers were staggering. The amount of chemicals and particulates needed to have any appreciable effect, even on local weather events (let alone global climate) approached a trillion tons. A single major hurricane involved the release by natural forces of energy greater than all of the hydrogen bomb tests ever conducted (Camille had the impact of a 250 megaton bomb - five times the biggest bomb ever tested).
Needless to say, our conclusion was, to the disappointment of our Pentagon chiefs, that any attempt to harness the weather as a military weapon would be a waste of resources. This was only one of many scientific ventures I was party to that gave me solid evidence that the idea humans could have a significant impact on climate is delusional at best.
Given the monumental size of any effort to attempt even a modest result, I think I'm safe in thinking no further resources were expended down this path.
To find a natural event that you can point and said with definite certainty that "this" caused a change in the weather in an eruption of a volcano.
Here's some data I posted a few days ago, which was never refuted;
In 1991 Mt Pinatubo erupted with what is commonly recognized as the second most powerful eruption in the 1900's. The ejecta was so massive that the total amount cannot be accurately estimated, but land around the volcano was buried as much as 18-20 feet fro twenty miles. There were 15-30 million tons of sulfur dioxide gas ejected as the plume rose to 31Km (21 miles). Over 90% of the material released from the volcano was ejected during the 9hr eruption of June 15th.
The result of this eruption and huge ejection of "Greenhouse Gases" over such a short period resulted in "unprecedented growth in the Antarctica Ozone hole. It grew to a size never seen before.
Now, all this seems to be ligning up with everything the Eco-ologists are telling us will happen as "Greenhouse Gases" grow due to man caused global warming. BUT, that's not what happened.
The cloud over the earth reduced global temperatures. In 1992 and 1993, the average temperature in the Northern Hemisphere was reduced 0.5 to 0.6°C and the entire planet was cooled 0.4 to 0.5°C. The maximum reduction in global temperature occurred in August 1992 with a reduction of 0.73°C. The eruption is believed to have influenced such events as 1993 floods along the Mississippi river and the drought in the Sahel region of Africa. The United States experienced its third coldest and third wettest summer in 77 years during 1992.
Overall, the cooling effects of the Mount Pinatubo eruption were greater than those of the El Niño that was taking place at the time or of the greenhouse gas warming of the planet. Remarkable sunrises and sunsets were visible around the globe in the years following the Mount Pinatubo eruption.
So as you can see, the second biggest eruption to occur in a couple hundred years only succeeded in cooling the world temp by around .5 degrees and caused some extra "wet" weather the following year.
Sorry for the delay, been working. I don't have the quote, but I recall hearing his rant on how those who are "deniers" or who support carbon based fuels are causing the destruction of the planet through climate change. That's when he started his 10 year countdown to Armageddon about seven years ago. Cheers
Here is his quote that I found, which stops short of blaming him for the Hurricane but certainly on the response to the Hurricane:
“Four years ago in August of 2001, President Bush received a dire warning: "Al Qaeda determined to attack inside the US." No meetings were called, no alarms were sounded, no one was brought together to say, "What else do we know about this imminent threat? What can we do to prepare our nation for what we have been warned is about to take place?" If there had been preparations, they would have found a lot of information collected by the FBI, and CIA and NSA - including the names of most of the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC and the Pentagon and the field in Pennsylvania. The warnings of FBI field offices that there were suspicious characters getting flight training without expressing any curiosity about the part of the training that has to do with landing. They would have found directors of FBI field offices in a state of agitation about the fact that there was no plan in place and no effective response. Instead, it was vacation time, not a time for preparation. Or protecting the American people.
Four years later, there were dire warnings, three days before Hurricane Katrina hit NOLA, that if it followed the path it was then on, the levees would break, and the city of New Orleans would drown, and thousands of people would be at risk. It was once again vacation time. And the preparations were not made, the plans were not laid, the response then was not forthcoming."
Regardless, clearly it was Bush's fault. <tongue firmly in cheek>
Actually, those plans were made and a response was prepared, but it required activation by the Governor. That stupid governor Blanco, and her equally stupid mayor of New Orleans - convict Nagen - both refused to ask for the help from FEMA for several days.
I respect Al Gore but not what he said in this quote. After every electronic failure there's this baloney questioning "Why didn't the electronics engineer foresee this" It's easy to ask in hindsight. They did the same thing with the BP spill. It's so easy to condemn after the fact.
if al gore had 2 heads he could start a rock garden. trying to convince him will all of the proof ever simply put just bounces off the rock like water.
Al Gore couldn't get past the first-grade science question on the show: *ARE YOU SMARTER THAN A FIFTH GRADER?* Being inherently stupid is evidently a new leadership quality.
A decade or so... wait... about two decades ago, I stumbled across a website that showed US rainfall patterns throughout some long periods of time... tens or scores of years.
After watching the animated graphs for a while, I realized that pretty much any part of the US will be wet AND dry, and with a cycle-time of about 5-10 years... floods to floods or drought to drought.
Then I saw it play out during the two dozen years I lived in California's Silicon Valley before I moved to Raleigh, NC, and here, for the past ten years, I've watched the SAME CYCLES recur.
Thanks to the hyperventilating mainscream media, who only get viewers if they can scare or titillate their viewers into 'staying tuned,' rather than by delivering thought-provoking INFORMATION to them, that's pretty much how any and every drought or flood or tornado or hurricane or earthquake is sold to the viewing public.
And mostly by people who never passed a math, physics, chemistry or 'earth science' class in their lives.
Their answer to any slight change in the weather is global warming..oops no warming for the last 17 years so now climate change. My answer is its weather!
I wrote a paper for college on Oceans rising, Global Warming, and used REAL science and REAL facts, not emotional hype.
The big problem with the Global Warming MORONS is that they tout their "BELIEF" as science and fact which it is not.
Al Gore has created a "CULT" just like Jim Jones for people who have nothing better to do with their lives and nothing better to focus on and he filled a spiritual void in their lives.
The link below is to the paper I wrote. The long and short it this. "We" have only been measuring temperatures for about 70 years. 165 years if you count the Farmers Almanac. The charts with scientifically accepted FACT dates back 800,000 years. This means that the nutcases are using a mathematically insignificant sampling to provide their theories.
I wish these people who claim to love science would actually accept REAL science and not their religious beliefs.
Very good paper, imnsho, (other than a few minor typos you might want to correct.
Absolutely a cult-type of phenomenon! And notice that, pretty much where ANY current 'differences of opinion' have been occurring, the 'discussion' has taken on cult-like characteristics, too...
Boy oh Boy is THAT right. We have dumbed down the school system to the point where kids cannot think any more and if you were to ask them "reason" through a problem, they would vacantly stare at you. We have a generation that's unfit for any higher job than being a cashier behind a cash register at McDonalds. A place where there are photos next to the name on the register, where sizes are visual - and even THAT was to tough. They were forced to make all the soda's one size, one price.
I have sat in our local library with students I tutor and spent days with them trying to make them understand basic logic and reasoning. I have always felt that if a student could understand mathematics, they would be able to reason, BUT it seems that these kids have had ANY ability to look at two expressions and determine if they were comparable or not beaten out of them by facebook. We always reach a impasse on "what does x=?" Me "X has no value, none is needed since we are not seeking a solution" him, "do you mean that since it has no value, we are talking about money?" me, "No, we aren't seeking a solution so "x" is just a variable that does not equal any number" (this is after a day explaining variables)", "Today we are trying to determine if one expression will equal another".
I then try giving "x" a value of 1 and go through it again. (yes I know that's not good workmanship, but I'll try about anything at this point). two hours later we call it a night and go outside where we see a rose bush and I start all over counting buds on a branch and tell him that x equals one branch of buds now I work my way through the expression with one rose bush making him write notes. Rolling over to another bush I do the same thing as he writes notes. Then I take his notebook and next to each set I write the expression and show it to him, asking, "are they the same"? "No sir they aren't the same. Bush 1 is real red and bush 2 is more pink."
I give him a ride home and talk to his parents and suggest a career in government.
They had weather extremes long before climate change, and they'll continue even after climate change. It's just like three years ago we had a mild winter, followed by a hot summer, followed by another mild winter. People wondered if our climate had changed forever. It hadn't. The climate in my area has only changed very little, maybe 1C, in a 100 years. The 1C on average in 100 years is a huge deal for the planet, but when the weather is 10C above/below average on a particular day, the 1C doesn't matter.
Such phenomena as this is why all the libtard Chicken Littles are now calling "global warming" "climate change." This way, they can attach "man-made" to any unusual thing the weather does, that enabling radicals to shut down the coal industry, stop drilling and divert tax revenue to their useless feel-good projects. Our more than equal elite betters (as I sarcastically like to call them) will never admit that there has always been climate change. And there always will be.
When he was in college, Al Gore took a class from Science Professor Revelle. Revelle is the father of Climate Change/Global Warming. Revelle later recanted his theory saying that there was not enough evidence to support it. Gore, however, went on to make a career of it, even though he only got a "D" in the class. He continues to tout the Global Warming mantra even though he knows it's a hoax. Recently, 31,000 scientists, 9,000 of them climatologists, signed a petition declaring Global Warming to be a hoax.
When I and Al Gore were kids, all the environmental wackos were screaming that we were about to have a HUGE deep freeze of a new ice age by 2000. They said everything would be froze solid down to that very cool spot called Miami. Everything south of Miami would reach a thawing point sometime during the day, but since the enlarged ice caps might force a shifting in the earths crust (perhaps bringing the magnetic and polar north poles back into alignment), they were not certain that Havana Cuba might be under snow. All if we didn't stop using leaded gas and generate electric power with Nuclear Power by 1980.
I can feel the freeze right now. I guess I'd better start the fireplace here on the 40th parallel.
I remember those days and that prediction. It was no where near the extreme cooling that you describe. Rather, it was part of the long term warming and cooling cycles that happen naturally over the centuries. Then however the unnatural warming trend we are experiencing now started to kick in and the prediction changed to a coming global warming which is happening today and which is causing the climate upheavals we now hear about on a weekly basis.
Climate upheavals, wow, that sounds serious. Might I suggest you lay off the weather channel for a while? Just skip it for a few days at a time, then a few more. I'm sure that in a month or so those old dark clouds of world destruction will pass right into a peaceful sunset.
Science versus religious environmentalism. They used to be happy getting stoned in the forest as they "got back to nature". Now they want to convince us that if we don't cling to a tree and pray to the weather god, she is going to destroy us all in "climate upheavals" (I think that's what we used to call "storms").
BTW, isn't NASA the organization that our Dear Leader tasked with Muslim outreach? That fits their charter about as well as the propaganda they're spewing (e.g. the link you provided) all in the name of income redistribution from the developed countries to the underdeveloped countries.
Oh yeah! The Muslim thing. I forgot about that. So, NASA must therefore be wrong... my bad! BTW, are you "spewing" fact or opinion. Any links to back up your allegations?
Spewing is a technique used by trolls on this site, IMHO. NASA is frequently very wrong. Especially around budget time. They can gin up an atmospheric crisis with the best of the voodoo wizards at the SSI. they did it with the ozone hole in the 80s and 90s, global cooling and now Anthropomorphic global warming... I mean climate change. It sucks when the atmospheric physics doesn't follow along with ones clever bumper sticker ideology. Follow the money when it comes to federal funding of agencies. Cheers
I want you to choose to read the data and make your own decision. It's pretty cut and dried to me, but perhaps you have a more, um, "nuanced" position?
I'm looking at scientific data that states very plainly that there has been no warming whatsoever in 30 years. You, on the other hand, are looking at data that has been "fiddled with".
fountianhead - The graph is odd in that it shows a blip of increase every 100,000 years. Where are we on that line? Why we are RIGHT on the next 100,000 year blip.
Also since the "scale is so compressed, you would never see a increased blip for a period of even 500 years on a scale of 650,000 years in a couple inches and since nobody was there to make accurate readings, projections are based of gases collected from polar ice analysis.
I have considered your "proof" and found it "lame". .
Johnny says Jane hit him in the arm (which she did not) Jane says she didn't hit Johnny but because she's trying to prove that she didn't him, nobody believes her. The next time Johnny tells Jane that if she will give him a dollar, he won't accuse her of hitting him.
Now lets substitute a few names.
Al Gore (and his minions) claims that there is global warming and climate upheavals are the result and mankinds industry is to blame for it all. Industry says it's a lie, that they have not clanged the climate, it's just as it's always been. But Al just keeps on lieing. Then one day he talks to congress and tells them if they spend $20 trillion dollars the climate upheavals will be better. He skims off the top along with his libtard buddies who all bought stock in "environmentally green industries" and as trillions are sucked out of traditional industries, more and more people are laid off and can't find work. But Big Al is happy because he is rich and can fly his polluting jet all over while we can't afford to put gas in a Pus-us. (Prius)
Are you kidding? If you consider THAT graph scientific evidence, then a dog droppings on the sidewalk can be analyzed to predict how world events are going to occur. It's not even up to the level of hockey stick voodoo science.
Do the math. I'm not going to do your homework for you. But here is how you set it up - lets say that graph is 5 inches wide (it really won't matter) and that, as was stated, the graph is 650,000 years in length. If you divide 650,000 by the size of the image resolution (the image size is 743x369) of 743 times 5 (the length of the graph), that will tell you how many years are represented by each pixel along that graph. So lets write it out - 650,000/743x5= number of years represented by each pixel of that graph. (Hint- remember to multiply the 743x5 before dividing 650,000 by it)
Ok, now that you've gotten that the first thing you will see is that it's a size smaller than you can display on you monitor, less than one pixel. Multiplying it by my 500 year challenge will show than a perpendicular line MIGHT be seen on the graph that will be around 20 pixels wide out of the 3,715 pixels along that graph. But all of mankinds actual scientific measurement of weather will only be 5 pixels wide, and you want to claim that a 5 pixel, dust grain (the size of the industrial revolution to today) is sufficient data to make the claims you do? Or even NASA?
I understand you are having problems with this, you're most likely the product of a public education system where your parents thought you were being sent to learn to think independently.
I cannot "prove" that a lie is wrong since it has no basis in reality. It's impossible to disprove a negative. I say global warming is a lie, but you turn on a TV and listen to the weatherman tell you that it's warmer outside than it was last year in someplace. Well, it's ALWAYS warmer someplace than where you are but that does not prove GW is real.
We are currently at the normal peak of the 11 year sunspot cycle, which accounts for the increased hurricanes and tornados. Solar activity is at a maximum which does heat the earth which causes more storms, but it's due to the cycle, not man caused GW.
If you scroll up a bit you'll see a post I made about the eruption of Mt Pinatubo in 1991. More greenhouse gases were vomited out in 6 hours than we have generated in 150 years, but the entire Earth COOLED a half a degree and there was a bit more rain the next couple years as the Earth washed the soot out of the skies. That was it.
Wait around a while and the weather WILL change. Wait long enough and it will be warmer. Wait long enough and it will be colder. If you call that CC, I'll agree with you, but if you keep insisting that there is going to be this great upheaval of the climate and polar bears are drowning (what stupidity was THAT farce!) all we can do is laugh at it.
Actually I am the product of 12 years of Catholic education, but don't worry, I am fully recovered. I think I might have been better off in public schools as far as critical thinking goes but that is water under the bridge. Do you always assume that opinions you disagree with are solely based on lies? Maybe negatives can't be disproved, but lies can. Have a nice life.
The reality of how little humans could do to alter weather events quickly set in. Starting with the "nuclear Winter" studies, the numbers were staggering. The amount of chemicals and particulates needed to have any appreciable effect, even on local weather events (let alone global climate) approached a trillion tons. A single major hurricane involved the release by natural forces of energy greater than all of the hydrogen bomb tests ever conducted (Camille had the impact of a 250 megaton bomb - five times the biggest bomb ever tested).
Needless to say, our conclusion was, to the disappointment of our Pentagon chiefs, that any attempt to harness the weather as a military weapon would be a waste of resources. This was only one of many scientific ventures I was party to that gave me solid evidence that the idea humans could have a significant impact on climate is delusional at best.
Here's some data I posted a few days ago, which was never refuted;
In 1991 Mt Pinatubo erupted with what is commonly recognized as the second most powerful eruption in the 1900's. The ejecta was so massive that the total amount cannot be accurately estimated, but land around the volcano was buried as much as 18-20 feet fro twenty miles. There were 15-30 million tons of sulfur dioxide gas ejected as the plume rose to 31Km (21 miles). Over 90% of the material released from the volcano was ejected during the 9hr eruption of June 15th.
The result of this eruption and huge ejection of "Greenhouse Gases" over such a short period resulted in "unprecedented growth in the Antarctica Ozone hole. It grew to a size never seen before.
Now, all this seems to be ligning up with everything the Eco-ologists are telling us will happen as "Greenhouse Gases" grow due to man caused global warming. BUT, that's not what happened.
The cloud over the earth reduced global temperatures. In 1992 and 1993, the average temperature in the Northern Hemisphere was reduced 0.5 to 0.6°C and the entire planet was cooled 0.4 to 0.5°C. The maximum reduction in global temperature occurred in August 1992 with a reduction of 0.73°C. The eruption is believed to have influenced such events as 1993 floods along the Mississippi river and the drought in the Sahel region of Africa. The United States experienced its third coldest and third wettest summer in 77 years during 1992.
Overall, the cooling effects of the Mount Pinatubo eruption were greater than those of the El Niño that was taking place at the time or of the greenhouse gas warming of the planet. Remarkable sunrises and sunsets were visible around the globe in the years following the Mount Pinatubo eruption.
So as you can see, the second biggest eruption to occur in a couple hundred years only succeeded in cooling the world temp by around .5 degrees and caused some extra "wet" weather the following year.
Checks with me.
Cheers
I don't have the quote, but I recall hearing his rant on how those who are "deniers" or who support carbon based fuels are causing the destruction of the planet through climate change. That's when he started his 10 year countdown to Armageddon about seven years ago.
Cheers
“Four years ago in August of 2001, President Bush received a dire warning: "Al Qaeda determined to attack inside the US." No meetings were called, no alarms were sounded, no one was brought together to say, "What else do we know about this imminent threat? What can we do to prepare our nation for what we have been warned is about to take place?" If there had been preparations, they would have found a lot of information collected by the FBI, and CIA and NSA - including the names of most of the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC and the Pentagon and the field in Pennsylvania. The warnings of FBI field offices that there were suspicious characters getting flight training without expressing any curiosity about the part of the training that has to do with landing. They would have found directors of FBI field offices in a state of agitation about the fact that there was no plan in place and no effective response. Instead, it was vacation time, not a time for preparation. Or protecting the American people.
Four years later, there were dire warnings, three days before Hurricane Katrina hit NOLA, that if it followed the path it was then on, the levees would break, and the city of New Orleans would drown, and thousands of people would be at risk. It was once again vacation time. And the preparations were not made, the plans were not laid, the response then was not forthcoming."
Regardless, clearly it was Bush's fault. <tongue firmly in cheek>
Being inherently stupid is evidently a new leadership quality.
After watching the animated graphs for a while, I realized that pretty much any part of the US will be wet AND dry, and with a cycle-time of about 5-10 years... floods to floods or drought to drought.
Then I saw it play out during the two dozen years I lived in California's Silicon Valley before I moved to Raleigh, NC, and here, for the past ten years, I've watched the SAME CYCLES recur.
Thanks to the hyperventilating mainscream media, who only get viewers if they can scare or titillate their viewers into 'staying tuned,' rather than by delivering thought-provoking INFORMATION to them, that's pretty much how any and every drought or flood or tornado or hurricane or earthquake is sold to the viewing public.
And mostly by people who never passed a math, physics, chemistry or 'earth science' class in their lives.
Yes, it does piss me off, btw!
The big problem with the Global Warming MORONS is that they tout their "BELIEF" as science and fact which it is not.
Al Gore has created a "CULT" just like Jim Jones for people who have nothing better to do with their lives and nothing better to focus on and he filled a spiritual void in their lives.
The link below is to the paper I wrote. The long and short it this. "We" have only been measuring temperatures for about 70 years. 165 years if you count the Farmers Almanac. The charts with scientifically accepted FACT dates back 800,000 years. This means that the nutcases are using a mathematically insignificant sampling to provide their theories.
I wish these people who claim to love science would actually accept REAL science and not their religious beliefs.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ipnvo5k4qflrq0...
Absolutely a cult-type of phenomenon! And notice that, pretty much where ANY current 'differences of opinion' have been occurring, the 'discussion' has taken on cult-like characteristics, too...
On average, Critical Thinking is Dead.
I have sat in our local library with students I tutor and spent days with them trying to make them understand basic logic and reasoning. I have always felt that if a student could understand mathematics, they would be able to reason, BUT it seems that these kids have had ANY ability to look at two expressions and determine if they were comparable or not beaten out of them by facebook. We always reach a impasse on "what does x=?" Me "X has no value, none is needed since we are not seeking a solution" him, "do you mean that since it has no value, we are talking about money?" me, "No, we aren't seeking a solution so "x" is just a variable that does not equal any number" (this is after a day explaining variables)", "Today we are trying to determine if one expression will equal another".
I then try giving "x" a value of 1 and go through it again. (yes I know that's not good workmanship, but I'll try about anything at this point). two hours later we call it a night and go outside where we see a rose bush and I start all over counting buds on a branch and tell him that x equals one branch of buds now I work my way through the expression with one rose bush making him write notes. Rolling over to another bush I do the same thing as he writes notes. Then I take his notebook and next to each set I write the expression and show it to him, asking, "are they the same"? "No sir they aren't the same. Bush 1 is real red and bush 2 is more pink."
I give him a ride home and talk to his parents and suggest a career in government.
Our more than equal elite betters (as I sarcastically like to call them) will never admit that there has always been climate change. And there always will be.
Of course cold air is hovering over the Great Lakes area.
I can feel the freeze right now. I guess I'd better start the fireplace here on the 40th parallel.
I research many sources for my information on climate change, one of those links is as follows:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/....
Can you offer me any links to back up your research (assuming you do research)?
Cheers
http://www.space.com/8725-nasa-chief-bol...
Also since the "scale is so compressed, you would never see a increased blip for a period of even 500 years on a scale of 650,000 years in a couple inches and since nobody was there to make accurate readings, projections are based of gases collected from polar ice analysis.
I have considered your "proof" and found it "lame".
.
Johnny says Jane hit him in the arm (which she did not) Jane says she didn't hit Johnny but because she's trying to prove that she didn't him, nobody believes her. The next time Johnny tells Jane that if she will give him a dollar, he won't accuse her of hitting him.
Now lets substitute a few names.
Al Gore (and his minions) claims that there is global warming and climate upheavals are the result and mankinds industry is to blame for it all. Industry says it's a lie, that they have not clanged the climate, it's just as it's always been. But Al just keeps on lieing. Then one day he talks to congress and tells them if they spend $20 trillion dollars the climate upheavals will be better. He skims off the top along with his libtard buddies who all bought stock in "environmentally green industries" and as trillions are sucked out of traditional industries, more and more people are laid off and can't find work. But Big Al is happy because he is rich and can fly his polluting jet all over while we can't afford to put gas in a Pus-us. (Prius)
Do the math. I'm not going to do your homework for you. But here is how you set it up - lets say that graph is 5 inches wide (it really won't matter) and that, as was stated, the graph is 650,000 years in length. If you divide 650,000 by the size of the image resolution (the image size is 743x369) of 743 times 5 (the length of the graph), that will tell you how many years are represented by each pixel along that graph. So lets write it out - 650,000/743x5= number of years represented by each pixel of that graph. (Hint- remember to multiply the 743x5 before dividing 650,000 by it)
Ok, now that you've gotten that the first thing you will see is that it's a size smaller than you can display on you monitor, less than one pixel. Multiplying it by my 500 year challenge will show than a perpendicular line MIGHT be seen on the graph that will be around 20 pixels wide out of the 3,715 pixels along that graph. But all of mankinds actual scientific measurement of weather will only be 5 pixels wide, and you want to claim that a 5 pixel, dust grain (the size of the industrial revolution to today) is sufficient data to make the claims you do? Or even NASA?
It's popular gobbledygook, not science.
.
I cannot "prove" that a lie is wrong since it has no basis in reality. It's impossible to disprove a negative. I say global warming is a lie, but you turn on a TV and listen to the weatherman tell you that it's warmer outside than it was last year in someplace. Well, it's ALWAYS warmer someplace than where you are but that does not prove GW is real.
We are currently at the normal peak of the 11 year sunspot cycle, which accounts for the increased hurricanes and tornados. Solar activity is at a maximum which does heat the earth which causes more storms, but it's due to the cycle, not man caused GW.
If you scroll up a bit you'll see a post I made about the eruption of Mt Pinatubo in 1991. More greenhouse gases were vomited out in 6 hours than we have generated in 150 years, but the entire Earth COOLED a half a degree and there was a bit more rain the next couple years as the Earth washed the soot out of the skies. That was it.
Wait around a while and the weather WILL change. Wait long enough and it will be warmer. Wait long enough and it will be colder. If you call that CC, I'll agree with you, but if you keep insisting that there is going to be this great upheaval of the climate and polar bears are drowning (what stupidity was THAT farce!) all we can do is laugh at it.