When I kept 2010 checked, and clicked redraw to compare it against other years, ( I started at ’99…..’98  was incomplete… IMAGINE THAT!)

I started at 25k ft. 99, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 were ALL warmer than 2010 in most or all of  january. So, I checked other altitudes.
And funny enough, the lower I went, the warmer this january was compared to other years, but the HIGHER I went, the COLDER it was in comparison. Our weather isnt just on the surface, Jim… it actually starts at higher altitudes. If you paid attention in science, youd know that its not just on the surface. So you need to look at the whole picture.

As with any other, youre a liberal who runs off with assumptions, media lies, conjecture and stretches of the truth wherever you can to try to appear to be right, instead of applying the TRUTH and COMMON SENSE along with correct complete data.

If you want to buy bridges and swamps people are selling, go for it. Just dont expect anyone else to.

A couple things for you to think about, since you only seem interesting in looking for ways to squirm out of answering questions:
1. the global warming idiots like Al Gore started this nonsense as far back as the late 80′s.  Back then, they said we have 10 years and the earth is going to be ruined. They said things like “the fish in the oceans will all be gone”. They come back with this crap every 10 years or so. If Im not mistaken, we’re all still here, so is the earth, so are the fish, and everything is fine (cept not in the heads of people that are dumb enough to believe Al Gore.)Whats also funny is the majority of scientists back then said were headed for another ice age,  which leads me to:
2. The earth’s core is cooling. It has been since it was formed, and continues to do so. So if the inner part of the planet is getting colder, do you really think that the outer part wont as well?  Things that make you go “hmmm.”
3. The best information on climate and weather patterns we could possibly produce is all gathered from less than 50 years of data.

50. Thats it.

I will wager anything that you believe in evolution, and the line of thinking there is that the earth is millions upon millions of years old. So in 50 years we know FOR SURE, EXACTLY what the earth is doing and will do in the future? Come on.
I can do this all day buddy.
Common sense wont answer everything, but people need to start there before running off thinking we’re in a giant hollywood script and all gonna die from pickup trucks and cow farts.

Horse……. SHIT.

Were having record low temperatures across America all winter long.
So youre trying to tell everyone that while North America is having record low temps, the rest of the world is burning up?  Gimme a damn break. Use your head.
Even if the temps in other countries WERE up (which Ill bet theyre not at all)  it would even out. You cant have record cold all over, then claim the overall temp went up. Why wouldnt it have gone up here as well?
Its an idiotic argument that holds no water, let alone to the use of common sense.

Also, feel free to list where you got this “scientific fact”.

We can’t protect our borders because some yahoo has decided a mosquito is more important than national security, or some damn itty bitty fish is more important than feeding a nation.  Oh…off topic aren’t I.  Heh.  Ooops.  But it still relates.

We can only truly influence our small surroundings.  Nature will do what nature does….whack the climate when it damn well pleases.

Control? No. Influence? Absolutely.

It’s like the old “butterfly flaps its wings” thingy. Extremely complex systems can be drastically influenced by the smallest of inputs. Sand through an hourglass forms a nice little pile underneath until the conditions match up just right and one particular grain, special in to way, causes the whole pile to cascade downward. As the pile increases in size, no particular grain is guaranteed to make it fall, but the chance that any might increases.

After one of the more recent ice ages, there was a huge freshwater lake that took up a large part of what is now Canada and the north part of the US. It was contained at the east end by a massive ice dam. For whatever reason, this dam eventually failed, and the entire contents of the lake washed into the ocean over a very short period of time. The differences in salinity and temperature screwed up the workings of the ocean’s conveyer belt, and the climate was in turn was knocked out of whack for thousands of years.

Had humans, with their current level of technology, been around at the time, I have no doubt they would have been able to somehow destroy that dam prematurely had they been so inclined. A couple of carefully placed nukes would have done the trick. On the other hand, perhaps they might have been able to shore up the dam, and prevent the huge natural cataclismic event that followed.

By the way, a “pure” scientist wouldn’t care either way. People would be seen as part of the natural process, and the proper role of science is simply to observe, explain and predict.

Ok, seriously, you are referring to what the Earth/nature does.  We don’t control that.  We can’t.  We are insignificant in the grand scheme of things.  Climate change IS weather change.  The climate changes, therefore, the weather changes.  The earth cycles.  We cannot control this process.  What we can control are our own actions.  Don’t throw garbage on the side of the road, don’t dump crap in the rivers, etc.

So, basically we don’t disagree on the changes, we just disagree that we have any control. 

We agree.

“WE have no affect on the climate.”

Here, we disagree, and this could be debated forever.

But, my initial point is that when people use “weather” to bolster claims about “climate”, it demonstrates they don’t understand the difference. Look, if my side is right, and man’s pumping out of greenhouse gasses will warm the earth over and above what would have occurred naturally, there will still be snowstorms and record cold snaps. It’s just that they will be fewer and farther between. Right now, any given location is likely to experience cold near or beyond record conditions 2 to four times a year. If AGW is correct, those numbers would drop to once a year in about 50 years and about once every four years in about 100 years (that’s from memory so I may be off a bit).

It wouldn’t be the first time a single species has affected global climate. After the carboniferous period, when much of the world’s carbon was actively circulating through the global life cycle at the earth’s surface (a la your tropical “paradise” reference) there was a HUGE population of blue-green algae that inhabited the world’s oceans. For whatever reason, there was an almost universal die off, and as the algae sank into the sediments of the ocean floor, the removal of that carbon from the system resulted in a cooling period, thus ending the carboniferous.  Not only that, but the algae, which was nicely sequestered in those sedimentary layers, because of the slipping and sliding of the earths plates, ended up being fed into subduction volcanos, very abruptly adding their carbon back into the surface cycles. Thus, a new warming period separated from its cause by millions of years.

Well, what volcanoes can do in a day, man has been doing for the past 100+ years. Removing all that sequestered carbon from safely underground and adding it back to the surface cycle. To assume that this change would have no impact is a position I just can’t wrap my head around.