Tervetuloa | Welcome
As an American living in Finland, I started this blog six years ago to address the political and cultural issues in Finland and the United States - but lately this blog is just a place for me to make fun of Finns and Americans. :-)

Find out more about me from my personal or professional sites. Enjoy!

6.2.2007

Fuck it’s gonna be cold tomorrow!!

Tags: Uncategorized — Author: Phil @ 10:19 pm

-28C = -14F

Comments (39)

39 Comments »

http://www.fingrid.fi/portal/suomeksi/sahkomarkkinat/voimajarjestelman_tila

Luckily, they are building the 6th nuclear power plant (1600 MW). Over 13650 MW it is all imported.

Comment by tim73 — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
I blame global warming.

Is Gore visiting Finland?

Comment by Fred Fry — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 11:04 pm
Man I know. I wish I was still ill, but looks like I got to drag my ass to work tomorrow. Fuck indeed. I was kind of fond of the +10 degrees in January. Darkness sucked though. Happy I don’t have to be in the army now though. The whole winter was like -25Ã‚Â°C back then. Nice to spend a week in the forest in that weather. You could put your frozen trousers to guard outside the tent.

Comment by Keksi — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 11:10 pm
I blame human idiocy

Comment by Anonymous — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 11:13 pm
Well, this winter has been a piece of scheisse so far. Kid’s clothes required daily washing all the way to december. Usually the dirt season ends around the end of october here in Oulu. Now it is, how it’s supposed to be at this time of the year.

“You could put your frozen trousers to guard outside the tent.”

Yep, and then there was the constant rushing to the positions and back, when some trigger-happy guardsman mistakes the snapping sounds of the freezing trees for gun shots.

Comment by Antti (the redneck one) — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 11:28 pm
The effenheimer really adds to your statement. I makes you sound smart. Fucking smart.

Comment by maksalaatikko — Tue, Feb 6th, 2007 @ 11:38 pm
Global warming ? cooooll,,i cant wait. I got my sun screen…global warming is great…you dont like it ? then do something about it…
hahahah..stop your crying and go eat soma mÃƒâ€žmmi and stuff yourself…global warming ? bring it on bayyybeeee

Comment by born in the usa — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 12:35 am
I blame global warming. You can have Al Gore. What address do we ship him to?

Comment by winter — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 12:52 am
Our house is making strange popping noises thanks to the shit winter. Now it’s really cold and it didn’t have time to adjust.

Comment by gopha — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 2:01 am
Brrrrrrrrrrrrr….. Wow that is really really cold! Time to get really close to someone and get to know them better

Comment by Rick — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 4:56 am
Brrrrrr, Global warming sure sucks.

Comment by winter — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 5:05 am
hey winter, the new talking point is actually that global warming is true (it is so difficult to argue with hard empirical science after all), but that it’s not due to humanity and is in any case probably beneficial. Are you off some posting list??

Comment by mjr — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 6:54 am
-30C @ Vaasa… a bit on the nippy side…

Comment by FinnFreak — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 8:57 am
Well, poor man’s effenheimer is not really an effenheimer, it’s a prayer

Comment by Antti (the redneck one) — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 9:23 am
No Winter, I don’t think this is due to global warming. It’s probably more likely to be because of our “human shields” in Lebanon, no? :~

Anyway, I’m with Antti on this one. Here in Stockholm also until the last few days winter has been way too grey for too long. Thank goodness the weather has finally realised what time of year it is. Although it is a mild -14Ã‚Â° here.

Comment by JG — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 9:33 am
One or two days or even weeks of some cold and people get sarcastic about global warming? too bad..just keep that attitude up so we can write in the history books what assholes you were..we’ll put that statement right next to a picture of a polar bear or a glacier, since those won’t be around anymore

It’s Finland for fuck’s sake…it’s supposed to get cold here…

Comment by Kai — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 10:59 am
“It’s Finland for fuck’s sake…it’s supposed to get cold here…”

I agree. It’s “cool” to be in Finland. Now, let’s start planning that 6th nuclear power plant.

…if it gets any more warmer, we’ll all go bananas…

Comment by FinnFreak — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 11:29 am
If I’m not mistaken, the problem with a warm winter, is that it’s sure to be accompanied by a cold summer. Average temperatures don’t deviate much in Finland. That’s what someone told me recently; I don’t know if it’s true.

Comment by Kristian (in Espoo) — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 12:46 pm
There’s also the old belief: “Pihlaja ei kahta kuormaa kanna”

meaning: that if there’s plenty of rowan berries, the branches won’t be covered with lots of snow the following winter…

…which claim I’ve found to be mostly complete rubbish…

Comment by FinnFreak — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 1:00 pm
19. Wtf dude It’s about weather. Goddamn hippies.

Comment by Keksi — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
19. Wtf dude ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s about weather. Goddamn hippies.

Yeah, chill. Smoke a spliff or something. Come to think of it, it might be a major reason for the increasing power consumption in recent years. A good indoor garden takes several kWs of artificial light.

Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Feb 7th, 2007 @ 10:57 pm
” hard empirical science after all”

Ah the one that predicted Global Cooling only such a short time ago?

Comment by winter — Thu, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 1:15 am
It’s fucking cold down here in Tartu/Tarto as well. We just moved here last week. Anyway, I’m about to go wave the French white flag of surrender. If you know what I mean …

Comment by giustino — Thu, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 1:52 am
Hell has frozen over…

It has been ass-bitinglly cold in the upper midwest and new england for two weeks nowwith no relief in the forecast.

Comment by hfb — Thu, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
winter,

instead of your ignorant sneering why don’t you try and educate yourself. There’s no big controversy about the global warming in the scientific circles. All the credible research and professional scientist agree it’s happening. Bush administration has just tried to muddle the waters:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,1502486,00.html
http://govexec.com/dailyfed/0107/013007m1.htm

Did you know that they drive more environmentally friendly cars in China than you do in the USA? That’s why your cars can’t be sold there. They don’t meet the Chinese environmental standards.

On this issue you really should waive [sic] that white flag. Go rent Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”, you might actually learn something.

Comment by Åboy — Thu, Feb 8th, 2007 @ 5:40 pm
Here’s my take on global warming. You guys can throw in all the “empirical data” and all the repetition you want. It doesn’t mean that this “empirical data” is fact. For all we know, it can be trumped up. Meanwhile, weather recordkeeping hasn’t been going on over thousands of years. (Quick! What was the weather forecast for Noah’s Ark? Answer: 40 days of rain.) An American columnist named George Will brought out an interesting fact about the ups and downs of weather: that the Vikings actually did some farming in Greenland nearly 1000 years ago. Can’t say that this can be done today.

Having said all that, I equate global warming with Darwinism/evolution. It runs tantamount with “walking by sight, and not by faith”. While I’m at it, Adolf Hitler would be so proud of this controversy. After all, it was he who said, “The bigger the lie, the more the people will believe.”

Oh, btw. Lest anyone complain about how cold it is, I’m up for it. +25F outside and I’m walking around with a short-sleeved polo shirt in Columbus, Ohio. No one bothered to ask me what my hometown is (Buffalo). Having said that, most of them were wearing Carhartts. Now, are there any natives of Minnesota, Manitoba, Maine, Alberta, and any other points north of the Mason-Dixon Line who post here?

Comment by Jason — Sat, Feb 17th, 2007 @ 4:30 am
Of course the Americans stubbornly refuse to see the elephant that’s standing before their eyes. Americans are polluting the most and are responsible for the biggest sole amount of CO2 emissions. Bush is in the leash of the American industrial Ginpins and so his hands are tied, so all he can do is belittle the problem and try to forge the results of valid scientific studies.

There’s selfishness and then there’s selfishness. Short-term profit outweights our survival, it seems. At least according to some stubborn Americans.

Comment by Åboy — Sat, Feb 17th, 2007 @ 12:50 pm
FYI, the Global Warming isn’t only about the climate warming up. It’s also about the climate becoming more erratic and unpredictable as the winds and sea currents get screwed by the warming. You love to mock Al Gore with ad hominem attacks but your childish attacks can’t hide the truth in his words. He’s only one visible spokesperson for the issue though, the whole scientific world agrees with him:

http://www.ipccfacts.org/

Comment by Åboy — Sat, Feb 17th, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
Having said all that, I equate global warming with Darwinism/evolution.

Well put, Jason. As I’ve often argued myself, global warming naysayers are on the same intellectual level as creationists, and indeed often the same people. They even use the same arguments. It’s good to hear this from the horse’s mouth.

While IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m at it, Adolf Hitler would be so proud of this controversy.

I’m puzzled what good old Adi has to do with this. From what we know of him, he would probably regard the phenomenon of increased agricultural output in temperate zones as positive and wouldn’t be too bothered about scores of untermenschen being washed into the sea.

After all, it was he who said, Ã¢â‚¬Å“The bigger the lie, the more the people will believe.Ã¢â‚¬Â

Incidentally, it was Joseph Goebbels.

Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Sun, Feb 18th, 2007 @ 2:20 am
” All the credible research and professional scientist agree itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s happening.”

All??? so 100% say its happining? They all agree the world has warmed by what one degree?

Same for 1962 and Global Cooling. Didn’t they ALL agree?

If Global Warming could pass the scientific test, then we would not be having this discussion.

Its not a fact, its a computer projection. With some very interesting assumptions in that computer projection.

Comment by winter — Sun, Feb 18th, 2007 @ 3:06 pm
Well actually not all, true. The ones that have been bribed by the Bush administration refuse to face the facts and yap on about some “controversy” even though there is none.

Comment by Åboy — Sun, Feb 18th, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
Here’s an interesting tidbit:

“In December 2004, an article by geologist and historian of science Naomi Oreskes summarized a study of the scientific literature on climate change.[2] The essay concluded that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The author analyzed 928 abstracts of papers from refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, listed with the keywords “global climate change”. Oreskes divided the abstracts into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. 75% of the abstracts were placed in the first three categories, thus either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, thus taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change; none of the abstracts disagreed with the consensus position, which the author found to be “remarkable”. It was also pointed out, “authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. However, none of these papers argued that point.””

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Some more:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4803460.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Warming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_global_warming

Comment by Åboy — Sun, Feb 18th, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
I don’t know about you but to me it seems clear which side is being dishonest and trying to manipulate scientists according to their own interests:

Alleged U.S. governmental interference in reporting

According to an Associated Press release of 30 January 2007 [16]:

“Climate scientists at seven government agencies say they have been subjected to political pressure aimed at downplaying the threat of global warming.

“The groups presented a survey that shows two in five of the 279 climate scientists who responded to a questionnaire complained that some of their scientific papers had been edited in a way that changed their meaning. Nearly half of the 279 said in response to another question that at some point they had been told to delete references to “global warming” or “climate change” from a report.”

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Alleged_U.S._governmental_interference_in_reporting

Comment by Åboy — Sun, Feb 18th, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
And winter,

no, the scientific community never were unanimous about Global Cooling. It was a popular culture hype created by a bunch of trigger-happy journalists misinterpreting scientific studies and jumping the gun:

“Concern peaked in the early 1970s, partly because of the cooling trend then apparent (a cooling period began in 1945, and two decades of a cooling trend suggested a trough had been reached after several decades of warming), and partly because much less was then known about world climate and causes of ice ages. Although there was a cooling trend then, it should be realised that climate scientists were perfectly well aware that predictions based on this trend were not possible – because the trend was poorly studied and not understood (for example see reference[8]). However in the popular press the possibility of cooling was reported generally without the caveats present in the scientific reports.”

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

Comment by Åboy — Mon, Feb 19th, 2007 @ 1:19 am
Freeridin’ Franklin, thanks for the clarification about Joseph Goebbels. Sure, he said it, but I would also give Hitler credit for blessing off on it.

As for Aboy trying to prove that there was interference with global warming reporting, notice that the headline says “Alleged”. It doesn’t say “Proven”.

BTW, for all of you who believe in the global warming hypothesis(GWH), things could be a whole lot worse. Try Hell, The Lake of Fire, Hades (and whatever synonymous term you can come up with). Human intervention to stop this “problem” will prove to be fruitless — no matter how much money you throw at it. If the GWH geniuses have their way, it will bankrupt the global economy.

Comment by Jason — Tue, Feb 20th, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
If the GWH geniuses have their way, it will bankrupt the global economy.

It’s fascinating, really. Jesus is coming back any day now, so we don’t need to care about the environment. Building equity, however, is as important as ever.

I guess you can take it with you, after all?

Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, Feb 20th, 2007 @ 9:00 pm
I also find it amusing that people who are so keen to criticise the predictive computer models are so keen to predict doom and gloom for the global economy if defensive measures against global warming are undertaken.

To put it in simple terms: exactly why does the global economy crash when an American soccer mom opts for a Smart in place of a Mercedes-Benz SUV? What if the same soccer mom – horrors – installs proper insulation and a heat pump to her house? Why are the heat pump manufacturing jobs worse than the SUV plant manufacturing jobs? Please explain. Pray for guidance if you will.

Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, Feb 20th, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
Predictive computer models are like predicting the stock market — you miss more than you hit. It’s more based on assumptions from the “best available data”.

As for overall cost, I heard something recently on a National Geographic minute on my XM Radio that undertaking every single initiative to prevent “global warming” would cost TRILLIONS of dollars to do this. However, the GWH geniuses believe that it is worth it. But then again, they have the ear of the politicos, not the ear of the people. These elitist GWH geniuses might as well tell all of humanity to go take a long walk off a short pier.

BTW, I am not against taking care that which has been bestowed to us by Almighty God. In all truth and honesty, the capitalist nations have taken better care of the environment than all of the communist ones ever did. Case in point: I had to read some material about East Germany when I was taking German in college. There was a section of the East German constitution that stated that it was the duty of the country to take care of and be responsible toward the environment. One of the former East German citizens pointed this out and said that it was an outright farce. The same thing could be said about the Soviet Union. US News and World Report did a similar write-up several years after the official collapse of communism. So, if you think that the industrialized nations are guilty of polluting the environment, point those fingers back at all of those communist countries, because they were some of the worst violators of pollution and contamination.
But, hey, you can’t tell Al Gore that. He’s “always right”.

Having said all that, I find it ironic that people will always assume that “global warming” is the culprit for every weather pattern. In fact, it’s insulting for someone like me who has lived through three major blizzards in the Buffalo area. Also, try telling the people of Oswego, NY that we have a “global warming” crisis. (They have a crisis of their own right now from 120 inches of snow in 9 days.)

Have we become so spoiled and comfortable to think that the Earth should be airconditioned? There have been times where the Earth has been extremely hot, and yet humanity survived through it, like, say, 1922. (The record set for 135.9F set in Al’Aziziyah, Libya as the hottest temperature has yet to be broken.) Then there are times when the Earth has been extremely cold, like during the Winters of 1976-77 and 2003-04. Yeah, I’d say “global warming” was responsible for this…NOT!

Now that I’ve ranted, here’s my observation in a nutshell: “Global warming” is nothing more than a political shakedown tool developed by socialists who want to stifle economic progress in order to satisfy their own agenda of a classless society that collectively “shares the wealth” against the people’s wishes. If you disagree with this, just ask the state of Oregon’s chief climatologist, who came under fire from the governor of that state for not preaching the “global warming” mantra with good reason.

Comment by Jason — Wed, Feb 21st, 2007 @ 12:49 am
Predictive computer models are like predicting the stock market Ã¢â‚¬â€ you miss more than you hit.

With the difference that climate models are based on natural laws, chaotic as they may be in that context, whereas the stock market is based on mass psychology.

In all truth and honesty, the capitalist nations have taken better care of the environment than all of the communist ones ever did.

That is very true. Marxism-Leninism had a very Ann Coulter-like attitude to the environment.

So, if you think that the industrialized nations are guilty of polluting the environment, point those fingers back at all of those communist countries, because they were some of the worst violators of pollution and contamination.

That is also very true, especially today with China, the USA being an accomplice by consuming their products so frantically.

But, hey, you canÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t tell Al Gore that. HeÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Ã¢â‚¬Å“always rightÃ¢â‚¬Â.

I didn’t quite catch Al Gore’s communist apologetics. If anything, he seems to be against the American consuming frenzy that maintains the communist dictatorship in China.

Now that IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve ranted, hereÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s my observation in a nutshell: Ã¢â‚¬Å“Global warmingÃ¢â‚¬Â is nothing more than a political shakedown tool developed by socialists who want to stifle economic progress in order to satisfy their own agenda of a classless society that collectively Ã¢â‚¬Å“shares the wealthÃ¢â‚¬Â against the peopleÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s wishes.

Ok, enter the black helicopters. It’s a communist conspiracy! If anything, economic recessions help in redistributing wealth…to those who already have it. We experienced this first-hand in the early 90s when e.g. real estate was being auctioned for pocket change to wealthy investors.

Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Wed, Feb 21st, 2007 @ 9:52 pm