“Snow Globe” Climate March Draws Thousands

As the Denver Post’s Hayley Sanchez reports, a little April snow can’t get Colorado down:

Dressed in snow boots and ski clothes, demonstrators chanted “Hey hey, ho ho, climate change has got to go,” and “This what democracy looks like.” The messages on some signs dripped in the wet snow but others’ stayed legible and said, “The U.S. must deal with climate change,” and “I’m with her” with arrows pointing to a picture of the Earth…

Denver’s march was just one of 300 sister marches planned across the world and in cities like Los Angeles, Dallas, and Washington, D.C., where more than 100,000 protested in near-record heat. People also used the demonstration to protest President Trump’s environmental policies on his 100th day in office.

“Where do I even start?” said Kate Paradis, a resident of Boulder, thinking about how concerned she was about Trump’s new policies and holding a giant banner with her husband, David Paradis, that read, “We stand with Standing Rock.”

“These giant corporations and the fossil fuel industry, the GOP and politicians, they’re all working together,” she said. “Trump was right when he said (Washington, D.C.) was corrupt, but he’s not helping us get out of the swamp. I feel climate change is urgent and if we don’t take action now, we’re doomed.”

Several thousand demonstrators arrived in Civic Center Park yesterday morning despite about six inches of snow on the ground. Locals are of course well aware that it routinely snows in April in Colorado, even after one of the mildest winters anyone can remember as we had on the Front Range this year. Nonetheless, climate science deniers coast to coast used the supposed irony of a “climate march in the snow” to distract from, among other things, the hundred thousand or so who marched in sweltering 90-degree heat in Washington yesterday.

This is where we remind everyone again that the weather on any given day does not tell you enough about the climate, or climate change, to crack wise–especially a day of weather in Colorado. It can snow in April in Colorado and climate change is a reality. There is nothing mutually exclusive about it.

Also, turning out in bad weather is a sport for Coloradans. Ask any Broncos fan.

35 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. PseudonymousPseudonymous says:

    Look at all these knuckleheads.  Crying about so-called "global warming" when they're out marching in the snow.  It's almost May!  What a bunch of loons.  Take this nonsense back to China where it started.


    The vast majority of Republican officeholders across the country.

  2. Andrew Carnegie says:

    Nice Global Warming Photo perfectly capturing your resident left wing loons out for a walk on a nice spring day in the mountain west.



    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      You nailed it, Psuedo and Carolannie. Thanks for proving them right, AC. So predictable.

      • Lucy MontroseLucy Montrose says:

        Hey, if it's true that AC works at a conservative think tank, then his corporate culture makes him deny climate change. They would stamp "poor fit" on his forehead and a shoe print on his butt, the minute he put a toe out of line.

        • Andrew Carnegie says:

          Lucy: AC does not work at a conservative think tank.  I do find humor in global warming protests being snowed out in April. I haven't laughed this hard since the boat protesting the shrinking glaciers of Antarctica had to be rescued by icebreakers because it was frozen in ice. Ya can't make this stuff up.

    • Roger Edwards, Candidate CO 6th DistrictPowerful Pear says:

      What else would you expect the stoners and homeless to do on any Saturday? Ever wonder why Denver is always one of the cities to field a protest team? Ample supply of social misfits.

      • spaceman65 says:

        Yeah, all my friends who marched who own houses, pay their taxes, and are gainfully employed.  Gotta love misfits


        • RepealAndReplace says:

          And can probably spell "America" and "morons" correctly.

        • Lucy MontroseLucy Montrose says:

          I actually worry about what PP is gainfully employed in doing.

          I hope it's not assessing the psychology of job applicants and people caught in the legal system.

          Because it sounds like he thinks if you are dissatisfied with the status quo in any way, you have low emotional intelligence. It sounds like he thinks if you're not cheerfully obedient, you are psychologically damaged.

          Someone who thinks like that could do serious damage to the chances of someone looking for a job or a second chance in life. 

      • Lucy MontroseLucy Montrose says:

        Because anybody who wants their government and society to do better is a social misfit, eh PP? The way you prove you're an upstanding, socially healthy person is to just meekly accept whatever our leaders do, eh PP?

    • spaceman65 says:

      The science is settled, AC.  The climate will continue to warm weather you choose to deny reality or not.  Luckily, fossil fuels are on their way out, whether you like it or not.  

  3. The realistThe realist says:

    Never ceases to amaze how willing AC is to flaunt his ignorance.


    • VoyageurVoyageur says:

      What else does he have to flaunt?

    • notaskinnycooknotaskinnycook says:

      Flew right over his head.


      • DavieDavie says:

        Sy-unce probably wasn't Gerbils' best subject in school (assuming it was even offered — more likely potions and spells)

        • notaskinnycooknotaskinnycook says:

          Now, now, Davie, as my wife often reminds me: Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. 

          • DavieDavie says:

            True — and we seem to be branching off into two societies –  skeptics that understand science and critical thinking, vs. cynics that believe in magical/wishful/self-reinforcing thinking regardless of facts.

            • VoyageurVoyageur says:

              The division is growing but there is some overlap.  The segment that embraces science on climate change has a faith-based aversion to GMOs, for instance.  Likewise, climate change believers usually have a faith-based opposition to nuclear power that treats an old Jane Fonda movie as biblically inerrant.

              • DavieDavie says:

                Fair points.  I'm somewhere in the middle I suppose.  While I think GMO's are probably the only thing keeping the world from widespread famine, my non-expert skepticism leads me to hope that we don't narrow our food's genetic diversity to leave it vulnerable to a single source of production, or disease.

                As for conventional nuclear power, just gotta remember the waste generated ain't going away in our lifetime (or 25 generations hence).  So the responsibility on us is to not preclude the options of many generations to come.  Clean Nuke is about like Clean Coal…  Nice idea, but practically and economically non-feasible.  Thorium nukes are still kicking around, but I haven't seen much progress, much less government support.  Wind and solar with battery storage systems should eventually advance enough to take on a greater load on the grid.  Actually, home and shared neighborhood power generation should reduce the need to rely on the aging power grid as well.

                • VoyageurVoyageur says:

                  The middle is where you need to be on gmos.  You can recognize their immense potential without applauding drowning millions of acres in roundup poisons.

                  As for nukes, my frustration with enviros is that that they go full pschyo to outlaw safe storage sites like yucca mountain, then oppose nukes for lack of safe storage.  When arrested for murdering their parents, they also ask mercy from the court because they are orphans!


                  • JohnInDenver says:

                    There is no "safe storage" for nuclear waste … There are spots that can be developed to be much safer, and that MAY be good enough risk prevention to be worthwhile. 

                    Standard anthropology puts modern humans on North America for something like 14,000 years. The effort to contain nuclear waste in salt deposits is engineered for 10,000 years. WIPP storage, near Carlsbad, NM, is the relevant example. The first waste arrived there in 1999 — after nearly 30 years of development (including some work by my father). As it is filled up, there already have been at least a couple of accidents, leading to a nearly 3 year closure. It is expected to be filled up by sometime in the 2030s — at which point it will be sealed off, entombed in salt. Once sealed, the site will be safer than it is now … but they are trying to figure out warnings that will be meaningful for longer than humans have had a written language.

                    There are other things much more threatening, but claiming nuclear power — based on current technology for energy production and waste disposal — is "clean" is a fantasy.

                    • VoyageurVoyageur says:

                      The point is that anti-nuke hysteria has made NIMBYism our nuclear policy.   For a successful policy, look at France — thanks to nukes it is far ahead of us on carbon.  The other plan would be to stick the waste up Trump's ass, right next to his head.

                      I do agree no energy is wholly clean.  Solar panels produce toxic waste, windmills kill birds, hydro has poor effects on rivers.   But Jane Fonda never made a movie about those, so the left has not gone hysterical.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.