Yahoo News Blames Cold Snap on…Global Warming

Those of us skeptical of Warmer hysteria don’t question science. We question their unfalsifiable religious claim.

You have to wonder if they feel any shame writing headlines like Yahoo News published earlier today: “Global Warming may be driving the frigid temperatures the U.S. has been experiencing this winter.” But the truth is, they don’t.

And there’s a reason that they don’t: those who push global warming/climate change/climate disruption theory are not part of a scientific movement. This is a religion, or if it seems more palatable to those who will recoil violently from being associated with something they see as scurrilous as organized religion, this is a philosophical movement and has been for some time.

It was scientific philosopher Karl Popper who popularized the term falsification as a line of demarcation separating scientific things from unscientific things. For instance, the question about the existence of God is unscientific since it is not falsifiable. The very nature of God makes Him a supernatural being, meaning He would exist outside the scope of our scientific laws and means of testing. You can’t prove God using science, but you also can’t disprove God using science. This makes the question of God one for philosophical reasoning and logic, not scientific hypothesis and experiment.

Meanwhile, a hypothesis that “it is always over 100 degrees Fahrenheit in the tropics” is falsifiable. It can be tested and disproved. Thus, it is a scientific concept.

And while the question of whether or not our globe is warming would seem to be scientifically testable, those whose entire careers and reputations are predicated upon the multi-million-dollar global warming complex, have made sure it’s not.

  • Long-term cooling trends? A mere “pause” in the warming.
  • Violent hurricanes ravaging sea coasts? Global warming.
  • A prolonged absence of violent hurricanes ravaging sea coasts? Global warming.
  • Oppressive summer heat? Global warming.
  • Brutal stretches of bitter deep freezes in ordinarily temperate climate zones? Global warming.
  • Shrinking Antarctic ice sheets? Global warming.
  • Growing and thickening Antarctic ice sheets? Global warming.

This is why it’s silly to continue having public debates about the “science of global warming.” Those advocating it have rendered it scientifically unfalsifiable, which means they themselves have rendered it an unscientific philosophical theory.

And that’s fine. People can believe it, tout it, worry about it, fear it, write about it, and tell others about it all they want. But those of us who are skeptical don’t question science – we question their unfalsifiable religious claim.

No. 1-18
History studies
History studies

1934, USA
“…That summer was exceptionally hot across much of the United States, though the summer of 1936 would cruelly eclipse even this one. In the Dakotas, Minnesota, and Iowa, summertime temperatures began early. By May 9, it was 109 in Sisseton, SD. By May 30 it was 113. That same day it was 109 in Spencer, Iowa, and 108 in Pipestone, MN. And as the heat rose, the rain stopped falling. Sioux Falls, SD had only a tenth of an inch of rain that month, right in the middle of corn-growing season.

From the upper plains, the heat and aridity radiated across the country. By June more than half the United States was in the grip of severe heat and extreme drought conditions. In Saint Louis temperatures would rise above 100 for eight straight days that summer. At the airport in Chicago, it would top 100 for six straight days and hit an all-time high of 109 on July 23. In Topeka, Kansas, the mercury would pass the 100 mark forty-seven times that summer. July would be the hottest month ever recorded in Ohio.

In the Far West it was even worse. In Orofino, Idaho, it would hit 118 in July 28. The ten states with the highest average temperatures in the country that summer were all in the West. And the worst of the heat wasn’t in the Southwest, where people expected it and crops and lifestyles adapted to it. Instead the heat scorched enormous swaths of the Intermountain West and even portions of the normally green Northwest.

Nothing could grow under such conditions, and without corn, wheat, and hay livestock could not survive. Alarmed, the Roosevelt Administration’s secretary of agriculture, Henry Wallace, dispatched an expedition to the Gobi Desert to see if there were any species of grass there that might be able to survive in the deserts that the American West and Midwest were quickly becoming.

But the heat and the drought were in some ways the least of it. On May 9 a colossal dust storm had swung out of eastern Montana, rolled across the Dakotas and Minnesota, dumped 12 million tons of dirt on Chicago, and then moved on to tower over Boston and New York. As they had in November 1933, people stood in Central Park and looked skyward, aghast at the blackened sky. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 350 million tons of American topsoil had become airborne in that single storm. The New York Times proclaimed it “the greatest dust storm in United States history.”

But in fact the greater storms, and the greater suffering, were still months ahead….”
Excerpt from: “The Boys in the Boat: Nine Americans and Their Epic Quest for Gold at the 1936 Berlin Olympics”, by Daniel James Brown

[That was the weather, too.]


The main difference between a medicine and a poison is dosage. Too much of anything can cause problems. Now, no we shouldn't accept an outsize burden, but neither should we deny a problem exists simply because it's inconvenient.


@johntfs - I really was going to leave the comments as they were, but you are presenting straw-man arguments. I don't think there's a rational person alive who would try to claim natural disasters, famine, water shortages, etc. don't exist. They do. The climate also varies. No argument there. What is not conclusive, despite climate hysteria, is that anthropomorphic climate change exists to any extent that their efforts to correct it will make an impact. One of the most falsely vilified gases is a necessity of life. Without carbon dioxide, humans would die because the plants that give them oxygen would die. More CO2 actually causes plants to thrive, which is good for everyone, especially people who like to eat. Comparing the globalists pushing climate change to the NRA is completely bogus. Violence against man is real, so the need for guns for self-defense is real. Any effort to promote climate change is nothing more than a ruse to find international commonality and transfer wealth, so the globalists can get the control they so desperately want. If you read their texts (CFR, Trilateral Commission, Club of Rome, UN, etc.), they admit it openly. And, the scientific community also admits that their efforts to thwart climate change would be minimal at best. It is beyond their control. Should we be wise stewards and conserve where possible. Absolutely! Do we need to be subject to the lopsided burden placed on us by the gatekeepers of the world? Absolutely not! If the Paris Accord parties were genuinely concerned with the climate rather than money and power, why would they allow agreements to pass that failed to hold China and India to the same standards as everyone else? They are two of the largest polluters on the planet. Have you seen the air quality in Beijing? Climate change is real because of the star we orbit. The climate change agenda is a scam.


I'm saying that just because the "Club for Rome" (and are there clubs for Florence, Milan and Venice, too?) uses global warming to push their agenda doesn't mean it isn't real. Figure most organization use real problems. The NRA doesn't push gun rights so people can defend themselves from Orcs and Dragons, they do it for fear of street crime or a power-hungry federal government. How much property damage and how many lives were lost in the US due to terrorist attacks over the past 30 years? Now, compare that to weather events.

R.L. Bays
R.L. Bays

Are you saying that religions are based on unfounded claims?