Gnash your teeth, you ₣#¢%!#& warmist loons

nevin's picture
Submitted by nevin on Fri, 2008-12-12 07:54

I took the following two pictures in Tranquility Park, in downtown Houston, Texas, on my way home from work last night:

Facing the intersection of Smith and Walker, towards One Shell Plaza
Facing the intersection of Smith and Walker, towards One Shell Plaza

Facing in the opposite direction, towards Hobby Center for the Performing Arts
Facing opposite direction, towards Hobby Center for the Performing Arts

Though the park is named after the Sea of Tranquility, where Neil Armstrong famously trod, lo, these many (pardon the pun,) moons ago, that white substance seen covering the grass is not, in fact, moondust. Rather, it is snow.

Having lived in Houston since 1994, I had only once before seen snow in the air above Texas. That time, it was only a few small flakes that fell briefly in mid-winter, circa early 1996. I had never seen snow clinging to Texas soil before. And this time, it consisted of plentiful, downy feathers, falling for an extended period, and sticking, during the first half of December! (not usually a particularly snowy time of year in most of the United States.)

Here is a picture of my car, which was parked at the time near US59 and Hillcroft, 10 miles away by road, probably 7 or 8 miles (11 to 13 km) to the southwest, as the crow flies:

My car, parked near US59 and Hillcroft

At work today I heard from colleagues who had seen snow in south Houston, and also in Sugarland, quite a few miles further to the southwest. This demonstrates that the snowfall was not some fluke affecting one neighborhood, but the result of a substantial front that extended across the metro area.

While the warmist faithful will cling to an orthodoxy in which they imagine the devil's molecule, CO2, to be baking the Earth as punishment for the sin of Man's industrial and vehicular activities, with the publication in this forum of my latest Houston weather photos, there is less evidence for this fanciful notion than ever before.


( categories: )


pr6's picture

Removal wisdom teeth at modern level is one of extreme methods of treatment when the tooth cannot be restored, or it injures a nerve and causes damages to a mucous membrane of cheeks, language and stirs to a normal bite.

Operation removal wisdom teeth needs to be made only as a last resort when other methods to rescue a tooth are already impossible or such tooth can be the reason of other, more terrible complications. For example, if there are the teeth, which can cause cysts, inflammations of a trigeminal nerve. Such teeth is better for removing.

The most frequent reason of removal wisdom teeth is a necessity of sanitation of an oral cavity in the presence of such diseases, as a chronic periodontitis in an aggravation stage when it is impossible to liquidate the inflammatory centre at a tooth top. Therefore treatment of a periodontitis should be timely. A multiroot teeth which are the osteomyelitis reason also leave. The stomatologist can remove a teeth at adjustment of a demountable artificial limb, but for this purpose there should be more strict indications.

The reasons of removal of a teeth are various. Candidates on removal are teeth strongly destroyed by caries which cannot be restored other methods.

- The teeth amazed with illness at started cases teeth start to be loosened.
- The broken teeth which cannot be restored.
- Incorrectly located teeth in a tooth number.

If it is impossible to restore such teeth conservative methods of treatment the stomatologist resorts to removal. After removal of a teeth in a jaw defects are formed, and an adjoining teeth starts to bend towards the formed defect. The Tooth-antagonist from an opposite jaw starts to be put forward towards defect. It is all can occur even at removal of one tooth. These phenomena lead to that chewing process is broken, chewing loading in respective area sharply raises. The habitual condition of jaws is broken and bite deformation develops. And it can strongly be reflected in the general condition wisdom teeth.

Nice photos. Climate change

Link7881's picture

Nice photos. Climate change really makes some people panic...Sad

Wow! Snow in Houston. You

James Heaps-Nelson's picture

Wow! Snow in Houston. You don't see that every day.

Has anyone ever taken a basic Geography Class?

susann's picture

Geography 101 - in any college. Heck, take it in high school - just take a freaking class!   Climates DO change.

 Thanks Nevin.  But let us all remember all the money that goes into the pockets of people like AL GORE and his cronies using outrageous  scare tactics.   Ahh... if only those pesky facts didn't get in the way of the lot of them perpetuating fraud on the public and businesses all around the world. 



Climate Change...

Marcus's picture

It is impossibile, even for the greenies, to reduce this argument to one of mere 'climate change' without 'global warming' other than for purposes of slogans and headlines - for the simple reason that it is too general.

The most basic question anyone could ask would be - "what is the cause of 'climate change'"?

The dyed-in-the-wool answer would be - "man-made CO2 causing global temperatures to rise".

Ipso facto: Global Warming


Lindsay Perigo's picture

Please accept the following genuflection in the spirit in which it's offered:

I applaud your lapse into uncharacteristic KASSness. I hope it's contagious, and that it will infect your mentors at The KASSless Society (does it still exist?). Smiling


Luke H's picture

their method has been anything but responsible, touting every minor mishap of meteorology as a foretelling of the end of the world.

That's something I can certainly agree with you on, Nevin.

Think globally, act locally

nevin's picture

Oil companies are currently preparing to spend vast sums of money to inject CO2 into stable rock formations deep underground. This is for the sole purpose of getting rid of it, in order to please government bureaucrats, sundry NGO meddlers, and misinformed members of the general public. The alleged benefit of this unconscionable waste of human effort is to prevent our planet from becoming too warm, by reducing the contribution of CO2 to the greenhouse effect. This, despite the fact that the degree of warming caused by a greenhouse gas is merely a logarithmic function of its concentration in ambient air (i.e. that significant percentage increases in CO2, or any other triatomic gas, will yield only diminishing returns of increased reflectance of infrared light from the upper atmosphere.)

And - the greenhouse effect of the CO2 is dwarfed by that of the H2O. So, why the demonization of the comparatively minor CO2, and its newly acquired status as a "pollutant"? Because H2O evaporates from the oceans naturally, and the NGO/academic/bureaucrat/politician axis has not wanted to dilute its message of water and everything natural being good, whereas CO2 results in large part from the actions of men. The CO2 can be attributed to the fact that Man has a large brain and earns his daily bread by the exercise of his conceptual faculty (those of us who do, I mean - NGO types are, of course, another matter.) And to a specific fact his brain has identified: that the best way, with existing technology, for him to liberate the energy to flit about at will, is to burn hydrocarbon fuel. The "at will" is what is so galling to the socialist planner - Man in the present era would be so much easier to control if he were shackled to his native plot of land like the medieval peasant they secretly (or, sometimes, not so secretly) wish him to be.

Global warming, if it were actually to occur, could cause increased snowfall in some areas. For example, high-latitude areas where is is presently too cold to snow regularly, could warm up enough to reach the slightly-subfreezing temperature window that favors snow production. Or increased temperatures could cause increased evaporation from surficial bodies of water, leading to higher precipitation in now-arid mountain ranges and other places that are cold but dry. But, even if global warming can be compatible with increased snowfall readings, there is one finding it cannot be compatible with: falling temperatures.

In Houston, a port city on the balmy Gulf of Mexico, the relative absence of snow for nearly 20 years (prior to last week) had nothing to do with either dryness or extreme cold. It came about because of the rarity of freezing conditions. And last winter saw the first snowfall in Bagdad in a century, the coldest temperatures in southern South America's recent history, reduced temperatures in central Antarctica, the longest season ever for Scotland's downhill ski industry, cool weather in New Delhi, a very harsh winter in the interior of Canada and the northern United States and, of course, a killer cold wave in inland China. A Greek friend of mine wrote in February to say that in Athens it had been snowing for 2 days, the most snow there had there since 1981.

If the warmists were even semi-responsible in presenting their pet catastrophe as a long-term development unrelated to brief fluctuations in local conditions, then I would agree with you that my pictures would be irrelevant in fighting the hysteria. But their method has been anything but responsible, touting every minor mishap of meteorology as a foretelling of the end of the world. And their very change of scare term from "global warming" to the nebulous milquetoast sobriquet of "climate change" shows that, in the face of the data, they lack the courage of their convictions.



nevin's picture

I aim to please, Glenn


By the way, Nevin...

Jameson's picture

... liked the way you spelt fucking. Smiling

Snow in Houston

jriggenbach's picture

I live in Southeast Houston, near Hobby Airport and the Pasadena line, and I can testify that we had significant snow that night, as did my mother, over in Pasadena. I grew up here, left for California in the early '70s, then came back for about a year and a half in the early '90s, before returning to California for another fourteen years or so. Now I'm back in southeast Texas again, helping my aged mother. I'd say it snows here ordinarily about once or twice a decade. The last snow I can personally recall was a year or two ago, when it snowed along the Gulf Coast south of Houston, but not in the city itself. Before that, I last recall snow during Xmas 1989 or 1990.


It's a snow job!!

Jameson's picture

Perpetrated by the Halliburton Cartel! >:-/


Billy Beck's picture

"It's now called climate change..."

And it's still the same bullshit.

What are those 'plenty of ways' then, you smart ass?

Marcus's picture

'Global warming' is championed by the IPCC and the main-stream media.

Have a look at the 1000 or so articles I have posted for the last year and half, all mention 'global warming'.

Excellent post Nevin. You're right on the money.

Don't pay any attention to this Luke asshole!

Hey, 1990 called.

Luke H's picture

Hey, 1990 called.  They want their theory back.

Newsflash:  It's now called climate change, not "global warming". 

The curently trendy theory suggests that more energy in the system leads to more extreme weather events on both sides of the temperature spectrum - so dry areas get dryer, wet areas get wetter, there are colder snowstorms, and hotter heatwaves.

There are plenty of ways to argue against socialists using climate change as an excuse to increase taxes and regulations.  Pictures of unseasonal snow in Texas ain't one - in fact, it's ammunition for climate change.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.