Comedy | February 11, 2010 | 60 comments

Hey Jon Stewart: The earth needs a new PR Agent. Snowmaggedon climate deniers unite!

Jon Stewart on his show no one ever watches

Now that it's snowing in the east coast in winter, we're screwed. Global warming has once and for all been proven to be a hoax. Just ask Jon Stewart. (BTW, It's almost insulting that Al Gore continues to be given all of the credit for raising global awareness about climate change. I'm ready for Colbert to start giving the youth of Copenhagen some credit for rising awareness about climate change.)

Can I take a moment to say, "Damn it Al, if only you'd used the term "climate change" instead of "global warming." We might not be in this ridiculous situation right now."

What difference does this make? Well, let's remember what this argument is really about. Now that it's snowing in winter, CO2 pollution deniers have been given a new reason to say that Gore was wrong. He must be, because the earth is not boiling!

Before I move on, I just want to say, "Thank you Jon Stewart for bringing the funny. My coworkers just mocked me for the amount of laughs I got out of watching this piece." If you haven't seen it yet, give it a look:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Unusually Large Snowstorm
www.thedailyshow.com

 

And let's not forget the people in Fairbanks, Alaska, who are angry at Al because they can't put in pools.

But it would appear that everyone appears slightly moronic when they take the time to openly mock people. This insult to graphic design was sent as an attachment in a joke email between two scientists about climate skeptics, and was leaked during the climate gate scandal. (You can go to the original post on The Guardian to find out who is being referenced and why).

I digress. The point here is that words are powerful. Global Warming was the term that the environmental movement agreed on to explain the process of CO2 pollution. Remember the image of the blanket?

"Carbon dioxide and other air pollution that is collecting in the atmosphere like a thickening blanket, trapping the sun's heat and causing the planet to warm up."

It was a term created so people could develop a quick understandable image about what was happening to the planet. But the truth of the matter is that we are in a pattern of radically shifting climate change combined with pollution and impact on the planet created by one species.

So if we can get the thinking away from "global warming" and weather, we might be able to focus on clean air and clean water and that minor issue that we are in the midst of the 6th mass extinction. We are seeing repeated examples of this issue as we note the changing migration patterns of birds, as well as the migration pattern of marine mammals. And yes, the glaciers are melting. Oh, but then there is that minor issue that global warming patterns could very well take us to the next ice age.

So where does that leave us? I don't know. Given the amount of energy spent on finger pointing it feels like kindergarten? I keep asking myself, in those last moments of life, what will we have to say to ourselves? Will it be, "I sure did spend a lot of time pointing fingers and telling them how they were wrong." Or will it be, "I did everything in my power to take care of my planet?"

Related Content

  1. groups:
    Community,   Politics,   Green,   Comedy,   3 more
  2. tags:
    Humor,  Comedy,  Climate Change,  Global Warming,  4 more
  3.     
    |

60 comments // Hey Jon Stewart: The earth needs a new PR Agent. Snowmaggedon climate deniers unite!

  • Paratus
  • JanforGore
  • SamuraiDave
  • Denica_Cassandra
    • +2
      Denica_Cassandra  

    • I can't believe how short-sighted people are. The comments on the Weather Channel's FB update - "Where's Al Gore now?"-- "Global warming, yeah right!"

      SO: Global warming causes more harsh conditions in ALL seasons - The deniers are saying "snow is cold though"... AH! It's really too stupid to respond to, but you kind of have to....

    • 1 year ago
  • EmperorThan
  • QuinlanT
  • ibrake4rappers13
    • -2
      ibrake4rappers13  
    • Image
    • QuinlanT:

      what about these scientist?

      "The current list of petition signers includes 9,029 PhD; 7,157 MS; 2,586 MD and DVM; and 12,714 BS or equivalent academic degrees. Most of the MD and DVM signers also have underlying degrees in basic science.

      All of the listed signers have formal educations in fields of specialization that suitably qualify them to evaluate the research data related to the petition statement. Many of the signers currently work in climatological, meteorological, atmospheric, environmental, geophysical, astronomical, and biological fields directly involved in the climate change controversy."

      http://www.petitionproject.org/

    • 1 year ago
  • Varex_Sythe
    • 0
      Varex_Sythe  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      For Pete's sake, this petition has been incredibly overused as an example, and it is beyond misleading. The majority of the scientists who have signed this petition have no expertise in any climate science never the less global warming, and the small percentage of these scientists that do barely make up an insignificantly small fraction of climate scientists who have expertise in climate change.

    • 1 year ago
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • Varex_Sythe
    • +4
      Varex_Sythe  
    • Image
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      Oh for fucks sake, I already went through this crap once.

      10,103 of the scientists are General Engineering and General Science. That doesn't amount to anything in the climate debate. Nor does the 3,046 Medical Scientists, the 2,965 Biochemical, Biology, and Agricultural Scientists, the 4,821 Chemistry Scientists, and the 935 Computer and Math Scientists.

      Of the 5,812 Physics and Aerospace Scientists, only the 587 Aerospace Scientists might actually have any specialty knowledge about climate change. That's just a hair over 10% of that specific group of scientists.

      Of the 3,804 Atmosphere, Earth, and Environment Scientists, only the 112 Atmospheric Scientists, 39 Climatologists, 343 Meteorologists, and 94 Earth Scientists have any expertise in a field relevant to the subject of debate. Only 28% of the group of scientists that should have expertise in the field actually might have expertise relating to that field.

      Of the total 31,486 total scientists who have signed this, only 1,175 have any relatable expertise. That's 3.7%, so 96.3% of the scientists on this list hold no legitimate weight with their opinions in this field.

      I'll finish off by posting the link to an article that addresses this general issue of scientists arguing for or against climate change. Because when you think about it, on a planet with over 6 billion people, I don't think that 31,486 scientists constitute any kind of a majority.

      http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11654-climate-myths-many-leading-scientist...

      By the way, this is the second time I have responded in this manner to this petition. I responded to this petition a month ago, and nobody who was for the petition could give me a good argument to counter my point.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      LOL, like the Leipzig Declaration and Oregon Petition that were proven fakes too? Give it up already. Do you have eyes and the ability to think and read for yourself? The people who LIVE in these places know more than any weatherman with a grudge.

    • 1 year ago
  • thedirtman
    • +2
      thedirtman  

    • I can't begin to describe the pain my Geography 101 professor must be feeling when he hears the surprise that there is snow AND Earth is warming. Warm air does hold more moisture. That's why rainfall is heavy over the tropics. There are places in Antarctica where it has never snowed... until recently.

      I don't know why Hannity would not have at least one fact checker that has taken GEO 101, or maybe PHY 101, or even ENV SCI 101. That pain that my professor once felt... well I feel it now too. So the answer is very simply explained in basic science...

      WARMER AIR HOLDS MORE MOISTURE. DO YOU EXPECT IT TO RAIN IN THE WINTER?

      Well, it has been raining quite a bit here in Arizona, and the snowpack in the Arizona mountains is 250 percent of normal this year.

      As for climate change and global warming...

      Climate change happens all the time. Sometimes it happens slowly. We like it that way. Our cities are placed in positions where the annual rains come in predictable patterns. We grow crops where we think it might rain, and well... if it rains we get to have food on our plates.

      Sometimes climate change occurs rapidly. There have been volcanoes that cause severe freezes for several years following. Comets and bolides have fallen from the sky. Earth tilts, wobbles, and moves farther from the sun. Continents shift. We prefer to think that Earth is just right for us, but the truth be told, most of the last 60 million years have been blistering cold. Glaciers have moved as far south as New Mexico. To say the very least, there is difficulty growing wheat and rice in the frozen Earth. Humans have lived during a freakish time when we are fortunate enough to be able to grow crops. That comfortable period of time was due to end, and caused scientists to predict another ice age back in the 50's and 60's.

      Neanderthal went extinct.
      Homo habilus... extinct.
      Australopithicus... extinct.
      Java man... extinct, I believe.
      All the other ones we do not know about... extinct.

      Instead, with the help of carbon dioxide our fears of an ice age have diminished. However, like a cartoon hero that is saved at the end of one episode we find ourselves trapped in another story, more mysterious than ever. Where is planet Earth heading now? How will our hero survive to the next episode?

      Over one hundreds years the ice caps will melt. The sea will rise. Earth is very old, and has been down that path before. Dinosaurs roamed the plains, and the beach was in Colorado.

      What really tears me up is how we want to go to Mars and terraform it when we can't even figure out our own planet. Climate change is inevitable. There is only bad and worse.

      One can say that cats are very affectionate. It is true. I can show you. Follow me into the lion's cage. Let's all gather around together real close inside the cage with the lion. I will take this stick and I will poke it in the eye. The kitty cat will awaken, and will he be angry? NNNNNNOOOOOOOO! Cats are very affectionate, and there has never been any proof that they will anger. Show me proof. Wait, wait, don't leave. Stay in the cage with me. The lion will not hurt you!

    • 1 year ago
  • RobotLegMeat
    • 0
      RobotLegMeat  
    • thedirtman:

      These are the incoherent ravings of a brain-dead lunatic. What a poorly written long-winded response to a poorly written long-winded article. Did you drink a bunch of lighter fluid before you wrote this crap? I'm just going to assume that this was posted by some random homeless community college drop out who wandered into an Apple Store.

    • 1 year ago
  • thedirtman
    • 0
      thedirtman  
    • Image
    • RobotLegMeat:

      I'm feeling very honored to have written the very first comment that you have responded to ever, here on Current.com. Something provoked you to finally post. So RobotLegMeat, tell us a few things about what you understand and don't understand. Tell me about your background so that I can respond to your question carefully.

    • 1 year ago
  • TheSwan
    • +2
      TheSwan  
    • Image

    • Is the major consensus still that Climate Change/Global Warming is definite? There are plenty of scientists saying otherwise.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientif...

      What makes it particularly fishy to me is that the mainstream media does not cover anything that would call the legitimacy of man made global warming into scrutiny, which is where I believe it belongs. Plus, considering that it hasn't been irrefutably proven, it seems more like a distraction than anything else. Climates will change, hell, it's how we developed a more intricate frontal lobe in the first place millions of years ago, but what the sensationalist media did is genius... associating "sustainability" with "climate change". With that said, I'm all about recycling, reusing, and moving toward being harmonious with nature; however, I'm not about politics. Politics and the free market, fractional reserve system don't have it in their best interest to accomplish these things unless they can profit from it, which usually leaves the rest of as wage slaves in their world, working to eat to work, for reasons we're barely sure of sometimes.

      Let's say for the sake of argument, that climate change is absolutely real and we're on the brink of a major shift toward warmer weather (be it from mad or just the natural cycle of the earth).. how will politics solve this impending problem? What can a republican do? Or a democrat? How about a communist? Oh, the green party! They have to know, that's their purpose! Oh.. they're all just arguing with each other? Hm.. seems like politics would just hold us back from actually addressing the problem, as it does and has done.

      We have the means for sustainability, we just need the powers that be to come back from their power trips.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • TheSwan
    • 0
      TheSwan  
    • Image
    • JanforGore:

      Jan, allow me, then, to switch the topic, just for shits and gigs, to show you how reliable that sort of logic is.

      Circa 1602
      "Is the major consensus still that the world is flat? I think it's actually spherical."

      "I don't need a consensus, I have eyes!"

      Perhaps you need to zoom out a little to see the whole picture, Jan. Did you know the big scare in the 70's was Global Cooling? And now we're all going to fry to death? Reeks of media hype to me. So they change it to climate change, **which the climate does anyway!**

      Side note- how is it that hundreds of thousands of gallons of salt can be dumped in the ocean, but the ocean's salt content stays the same?

      "The only significant natural source of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) is volcanic activity, while the only significant removal is through the precipitation of carbonate rocks.[16] In water, CO2 is dissolved as a "carbonic acid," which may be combined with dissolved calcium to form solid calcium carbonate (limestone). Both precipitation and solution are influenced by the bacteria and plant roots in soils, where they improve gaseous circulation, or in coral reefs, where calcium carbonate is deposited as a solid on the sea floor. Calcium carbonate can also be washed from continents to the sea where it is used by living organisms to manufacture carbonaceous tests and shells. Once dead, the living organisms' shells fall to the bottom of the oceans where they generate deposits of chalk and limestone. Part of the organisms with carbonaceous shells are the coccolithophores (algae), which also have a role in the formation of clouds. When they die, they release dimethyl sulfide gas (DMS), (CH3)2S, which is converted by atmospheric processes to sulfate particles on which water vapor condenses to make clouds.[17]

      Lovelock sees this as one of the complex processes that maintain conditions suitable for life. The volcanoes produce CO2 in the atmosphere, CO2 participates in rock weathering as carbonic acid, itself accelerated by temperature and soil life, the dissolved CO2 is then used by the algae and released on the ocean floor. CO2 excess can be compensated by an increase of coccolithophoride life, increasing the amount of CO2 locked in the ocean floor. Coccolithophorides increase the cloud cover, hence control the surface temperature, help cool the whole planet and favor precipitations which are necessary for terrestrial plants. For Lovelock and other Gaia scientists like Stephan Harding, coccolithophorides are one stage in a regulatory feedback loop."
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis

    • 1 year ago
  • antoine_99
  • ibrake4rappers13
    • -2
      ibrake4rappers13  

    • I dont think anyone is denying that theres climate.

      What im denying is the fact that humans can contribute to its change, and it has not been proven that humans can control and sustain the climate at a certain temperature indefinitely. So why make policy based on an imaginary premise like that?

      And i know some people may make the argument, "well maybe we cant stop it, but maybe we can slow it down"

      At what cost? Are you willing to reduce the qaulity of life around to world to have chance at slowing down a problem that may or may not exist?

    • 1 year ago
  • kennymotown
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      Reducing the quality of life by weaning ourselves off the fossil fuels polluting and toxifying our air, water, and causing disease? Reducing our quality of life by adhering to the principles of sustainable agriculture that revitalizes our soil? Reducing the quality of life by switching to clean, safe, affordable energy sources? Reducing the quality of life by planting trees? Oh yeah, I can see how doing all of those things would reduce the quality of life. Really, are you for real? How old are you? And I mean that as a sincere question.

    • 1 year ago
  • Ajil
    • 0
      Ajil  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      ibrake4rappers13, your asking all the wrong questions, bud. What everyone should be considering is whether we would be willing to be deny the fact that we are polluting the planet, destroying ecosystems, exploiting animals, exploited fellow human beings, exploit the resources for short sighted consumption; all this reckless-self-entitled-hysteria in the name of profits. Humans have been busy trying to understand the functions of weather since the dawn of existence, it is only those that refuse to sacrifice convenience, basically a greedy-ignorant-arrogant bunch, that are getting in the way of being able to change the path we are on.

      I would like to discuss how anyone could deny that we pollute this planet with many petroleum based products, not just the fossil fuels, which according to many of these skeptics allegedly produces the same air as every person exhales. Well if these same people smoke any type of substance, whether tobacco or other forms, then it would be of no shock the way in which they choose to treat their bodies reflect their attitude to all other life on this planet we occupy.

      I want to hear from the person that is willing to tell me that acid rain is natural for the location that it occurs currently; that entire ecosystems on land and the sea have not been destroyed from oil spills; and i guess that miles of plastic floating around in Pacific Ocean is healthy; maybe wiping out entire species doesn't screw up the food chain, and manipulating our animals for consumption is a much better idea then considering eating locally, and making the attempt to live with nature is a waste rather than arrogantly trying to claim dominance over it. Leave that for your utopian after-life, if you happen to believe in one.

      Here in reality, we have to be humble of presence, to live among all the other forms of life, call it interdependently, living sustainably, without all the notion of believing this planet and all its materials are for our taking, meddling and consuming, just to disregard as waste that we refuse to clean up. Last time I checked, the landfills haven't gone anywhere. They don't seem to shrinking either. Well nature has a way to handle its "waste". People would understand that if they had ever learned some biology, environmental science, or just happened to be observant. Take a look around. These negative results are of our own doing. These problems in our behavior have got to be accounted for and healed or we will bring on a self-fulfilling apocalypse, which seems to be what many are waiting for.

      I really needed to articulate all that. So ibrake4rappers13, and others that share his views, let ask you to answer your own question:

      "At what cost? Are you willing to reduce the qaulity of life around to world to have chance at slowing down a problem that may or may not exist?"

    • 1 year ago
  • leahl
    • 0
      leahl  
    • Ajil:

      Thank you for being so thoughtful, detailed, and articulate in your response. These are the details that are so often left out of the conversation and need to be spelled out.

    • 1 year ago
  • adveritas
    • 0
      adveritas  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      you are you kidding? read a scientific biology book.... for god sakes the creatures in the ocean changed the damn climate.... you don't think humans are.... have you seen the forests lately or have you heard of El Nino?? ARG!#$%!#$% it's like pulling teeth from an infant with you guys... oh wait... don't tell me, you don't believe in evolution do you.

    • 1 year ago
  • adveritas
    • 0
      adveritas  
    • adveritas:

      wow, well I guess I have to admit when I'm crazy too... infants dont have teeth and El nino is scientifically proven to have changed it's pattern because of deforestation and the increase of carbon into the air from human activities. so sorry about that.

    • 1 year ago
  • ibrake4rappers13
    • -1
      ibrake4rappers13  
    • Ajil:

      Those are all reasonable concerns, and i appreciate you taking the time to articulate that.

      And i agree with you one 100, but the problem i have is that the environmentalist movement has been hijacked by people who seek to control the means of production globally, under the false pretext of "global warming" or "climate change" (I wish they would make up their mind) Its just a scare tactic to get people to fall in line with their political agenda.

    • 1 year ago
  • ibrake4rappers13
    • 0
      ibrake4rappers13  
    • JanforGore:

      Jan i truly love your concern for the environment, but i wish you could detach yourself from this global warming hoax, it would do your cause alot of good.

      me and bushama were actually considering starting our own environmentalist movement, one that has nothing to do with global warming.

    • 1 year ago
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • insaintity
    • 0
      insaintity  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      A majority of the world's leading scientists have gradually come to the same conclusion over the past 20 or so years, that humans are affecting the Earth's climate.

      I remember following this story in the early 90s, and it was not accepted by the status quo and has never been acknowledged by the multinational corporations responsible for spewing titanic amounts of industrial waste in and onto every possible level of ecosystem.

      It seems quite clear to me, that those who profit from denying such a phenomenon as human-caused climate change, are much more likely to be those that stand lose their precious dollars.

    • 1 year ago
  • lifestudentno83
    • 0
      lifestudentno83  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      There will be no such thing as quality of life if the earth dies, because we'll all be dead. Either compromise on your lifestyle now and prolong society until we find a better solution, or doom the human race to a quicker demise. Your call.

    • 1 year ago
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • QuinlanT
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • lifestudentno83
    • 0
      lifestudentno83  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      Congrats on likening global warming to a fairy tale, using the magical religious bogeyman to attempt to scare me into remission.

      However unclear it may be that we are a direct or indirect cause of GLOBAL WARMING, it's a definite truth that we are a DIRECT cause of pollution, which could possibly affect global warming.

      Conservation and changing consumption habits do not only affect the probability of global warming but reduce our levels of pollution, which does wonders for the eco-system of plants, animals, and the habitat they live in.

      BTW, I read the first half of your comment before, I just decided to comment on the second half. You want to make it seem like because we cannot PROVE that we are a factor in global warming, that we should not be obligated to give up our high-consumption and energy-wasting lifestyles to suit eco-conservative liberals. But you're not, because you would be giving up high-consumption and energy-wasting lifestyles for the betterment of the planet. Unfortunately, you cannot see past the political aspects of the global warming and go green debates, so you are constantly attempting to debunk them to one-up your opponent. In reality, it's not the fact that I didn't comment on the first half of your comment; it's that I've already read and watched the statement and videos you're provided to gloss over your attempt at denying you deny global warming or man's influence on it.

      However, since you also think that religion is going to "rapture all the good people up to heaven after the trashpocalypse", then you probably don't give a squat about the Earth's problems. You let me know how that works out for you.

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • Toughth
    • 0
      Toughth  

    • Look at thermo dynamic systems. When you can use steam from a Nuke plant to create a chilled water system that can cool it down quite a bit, the same thing happens in the atmosphere.When you have the lighter warm air siting on the ground heavier cool air suddenly sinks into moister laden warm air and creates a sudden cool down on the ground and a lot more snow and rain.

    • 1 year ago
  • randallr01
  • leahl
  • Nephwrack
  • leahl
  • Animal_Chin
    • +2
      Animal_Chin  

    • Here's a solution: Plant a f**king tree! Or perhaps plant some hemp plants across the desert since the plants help to renew the soil. Everyone across the land plant a beautiful garden! We could even start an over-hyped, exceedingly banal & pretentious garden-of-the-year award show and cram it down people's throats just like the Emmy's as a way to promote gardens all over the world in a dual effort to rebuke Global Warming and Global Starvation in a one-two punch!

      There are plenty of ways to make the Earth a more beautiful and livable planet, one that is a bastion and cradle for life. Inventing a ridiculous tax that affords the Federal Government total control over the populace is not a solution; this will only add to our already overwhelming list of problems currently being ignored by any action.

    • 1 year ago
  • jhunter
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  

    • Ok, thanks Leah. Anyway, what I had commented before was that climate change deniers are good with using semantics and labels to get out of responsibility for their own contribution to this and to demonize others. I also think in the case of Mr. Gore, it is not about the planet or that they even give a damn about it. They just want to prove him wrong out of some deepseated hatred for not being able to break him. And they will try to make it look like he was wrong by using semantics even if they have to lie to do it. It truly is sad, even though this was funny.

    • 1 year ago
  • Philip_Robibero
  • Souljaboi
  • bansheewail
    • +1
      bansheewail  

    • Will someone please explain to the Pea-tards(Tea Partiers and other science haters) the difference between weather and climate??

    • 1 year ago
  • oppressed1
    • +1
      oppressed1  
    • bansheewail:

      Thank you need to explain it to the retards on this site who keep saying on their comments about how they have noticed that summers are getting hotter where they live, and the can see the differences in the leaves changing in the fall.

      ITs all retarded imo

    • 1 year ago
  • JanforGore
  • leahl
  • SamuraiDave
    • 0
      SamuraiDave  
    • leahl:

      your new format sucks I hate to say. It's difficult to follow a discussion. What was wrong with the old format? Can't you guys stay consistent? I've been on this site since 2006 and I can't count the number of times Current has changed the system over and over again. That's not keeping it "fresh" - it's just annoying! Hint - if it's not broke, don't fix (or in this case break) it.

    • 1 year ago
leahl
more from Comedy:
from the community

top videos