From the “weather is not climate unless it supports global warming department”, Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. responds to the claim elevated by Joe Romm (and now picked up by Time Magazine) that the east coast snowstorms are indicators of global warming. While you ponder that, click to watch the DC blizzard in progress via the US Senate live stream:
Comment on Time Article “Another Snowstorm: What Happened to Global Warming?”
There is an article in Time magazine (h/t to Marc Morano for alerting us to it) by Bryan Walsh titled
Another Snowstorm: What Happened to Global Warming?
The article correctly writes
“….it’s a mistake to use any one storm — or even a season’s worth of storms — to disprove climate change (or to prove it)…”
and
“Weather is what will happen next weekend; climate is what will happen over the next decades and centuries. And while our ability to predict the former has become reasonably reliable, scientists are still a long way from being able to make accurate projections about the future of the global climate.”
However, the article contains misinformation. I briefly comment on two issues presented in the article.
1. It is written
“The 2009 U.S. Climate Impacts Report found that large-scale cold-weather storm systems have gradually tracked to the north in the U.S. over the past 50 years.”
The current set of snowstorms in the Middle Atlantic states this winter actually have become intense further south than average. New England is certainly accustomed to these nor’easters. In an earlier post (see figure top), illustrates that the jet stream (as represented by the lower tropospheric temperature anomalies) was well south of its average position across the northern hemisphere. It is the polar jet stream which is where winter storms develop and intensify.
2. It is written
“As global temperatures have risen, the winter ice cover over the Great Lakes has shrunk, which has led to even more moisture in the atmosphere and more snow in the already hard-hit Great Lakes region, according to a 2003 study in the Journal of Climate.”
A new paper in EOS titled Severe Ice Cover on Great Lakes During Winter 2008–2009 [subscription needed]
writes
“After a decade of little ice cover, from 1997–1998 to 2007–2008, the Great Lakes experienced extensive ice cover during the 2008–2009 winter. The area of Lake Superior covered by ice during the 2008–2009 winter reached 75,010 square kilometers on 2 March 2009, nearly twice the maximum average of nearly 40,000 square kilometers. By this time, Lake Superior was nearly completely ice covered, as were Lake Huron, Lake Erie, and Lake St. Clair, a small basin between Huron and Erie (Figure 1a). Even northern Lake Michigan experienced severe ice cover.”
These news articles would be more accurate (and effective) if the actual behavior of the climate system were presented.
==================================
For those interested, here is a typical winter pattern when we have an El Nino – Anthony
Luboš Motl also weighs in on the issue of linking these snows here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What must be driving Romm crazy is that even Dem senators now admit that Climate Change legislation is dead this session. They’re blaming it on the snowstorm, but as we know it was dead long before this.
The storm is just the “Icing” on the cake!
“Democratic senators say a bill that was once a top priority for the party and for President Barack Obama cannot be dug up again during 2010.”
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/80485-climate-bill-buried-under-record-snowfall
still, you gotta love the way things work out – right when the plans to crank out comprehensive climate change legislation were due to get all wound up, “Forecasts predicted another six to 20 inches to fall on Tuesday and Wednesday, putting the city on course to break a 111-year-old record for its snowiest winter.”
And this on top of the fact that the Copenhagen conference was hit with the coldest blast of arctic air that Europe had seen in 30 years. Gaia just ain’t cooperating.
OT: I’m thinking maybe tv is to blame for the immature science by the political climatologists and their ilk in CAGW.. see below.
Romm left science for agiprop many years ago. He served in the Clinton Admin in the Dept of Energy. He liked the politics and hasn’t looked back.
The global warming means more snowstorms meme is such a joke that I don’;t think very many warmongers actually believe it.
Translation for this idiot? Do as I say, not as I do. I have all the crayons, and you can’t have any. No! The climate is my toy! I SAY WHAT IT DOES! UN! The Climate Isn’t Behaving! Make it stop! Pass a rule against snowstorms and questioning RIGHT NOW! The other.. scientists… are making fun of me… *sobs*. I want my pacifier!
I may be a total idiot, but shouldn’t the same rules apply to all sides? Isn’t science about questioning and debate, and allowing the data to support the position, rather than altering the data to make the position? More and more I see points of view pushed as fact, and this bothers me. People get paid to find the information, then say they won’t share it, except for what they’ve already looked over and made sure fits their opinions. Frankly, statisticians and mathematicians are perfectly capable and qualified to look at math.
The nature of science is attacking hypothesis in order to determine if they are true to the best of observational parameters. New observational parameters must alter the hypothesis, not the parameters, and, lest we forget, the earth-centric universe, with a flat earth was ‘consensus’. It was attacked, and successfully and rightfully. Let the science play out, and get the politics out of it.
In the United States, the National Weather Service defines a blizzard as sustained winds or frequent gusts reaching or exceeding 35 mph (56 km/h) which lead to blowing snow and cause visibilities of ¼ mile (or 400 m) or less, lasting for at least 3 hours. Temperature is not taken into consideration when issuing a blizzard warning, but the nature of these storms is such that cold air is often present when the other criteria are met.[1] Temperatures are generally below 0 °C (32 °F).
I think Washington is having a BLIZZARD!
The flaw in that logic is that weather is what we experience. Proponents can trumpet Global Warming all they like but when the weather that people are experiencing is colder and snowier that noise will fall on deaf ears.
I really wish people would come to understand the long cycle stuff. The coming ice age hysteria in the early 1970s was the bottom of the AMO. The global warming hysteria was the top of the AMO. We are now on the down slope again. I predict ice age hysteria in about 30 years.
From a UK point of view. Two years ago we had a light sprinkling of early snow when our government was passing it’s climate bill. Last year we had heavier snow. This year it’s been heavier still. Once is natural variability, twice is coincidence, three times is Gaia with a sense of humour? Maybe it’s the Gore effect, the bigger the legislation and economic impact, the more snow you get.
Add to the snowstorm timing the irony that Al G.’s AIT was released In 2006) just when the ocean systems turned to cooling. It was too late even then. Thus, they have had to yell louder and louder to distract the world from what was occurring in reality. I guess that that was the being of the Gore Effect.
A friend of mine just spouted the idea that wild fluctuations such as now are expected from global warming. However, it appears that ENSO events cause more wild fluctuations during generally cold times (the 1970s and 80s) than warmer (the early 2000s and maybe even the 1930s to 40s). Oh well.
Excellent response, such mega snow storms for DC area require the jet stream to be abnormally low, so enough cold air keeps the moisture into snow and not rain.
Of course they are adjusting their claims to prove this is what they predicted after all. It is obvious that vast vast interests are invested into the cap and trade. So much infrastructure has been set up and so many green companies have intentionally been created, waiting to make trillions of dollars for the global elite and convert people into serfdom peacefully. It is no wonder why our media is behaving like a communist state news agency. Covering up every climate scandal and even telling people cold and blizzards=evidence of global warming.
Personally I like the debate of climate change, because it is bound to wake up the smartest people in society that something is wrong. Having scientists break ranks will increase our odds of defeating the New World Order.
Joe Romm’s judgment has fallen off the map. I really think his judgment vanished when Marc Morano put Romm in a state of hysterical frenzy in a televised debate; Romm hasn’t been able to produce anything coherent ever sine
The widespread claim among the remaining faithful that “warming means cooling” is in fact very important – it signifies the final, complete shift of the movement away from science and into the realm of religion.
This is why – one of the key elements of any scientific theory is that it is falsifiable. A theory is put out, it makes certain predictions, if they do not come true, that theory was wrong and you work on a new one which explains the observations more completely. There should not be any great emotions attached to a theory that fails, because that is how science works.
BUT – the hallmark of a religious idea is that it is *never* falsifiable. Every possible outcome can be explained by some wrinkle in the doctrine, which is why it is impossible and futile to attempt to dissuade anyone from a religious belief through simple argument.
It is now a matter of *faith*, and as a matter of faith many of these people will go to their graves believing it even if the world ices over. To someone who sees things from a purely religious point of view, as the warmists do now, facts no longer have any meaning. Neither does logical argument.
But because of this they also have the problem that every doomsday cult in history runs into – what happens when you predict Thermageddon, go sit on the hill and wait for it, and then it doesn’t show up? What happens is that the general public moves on and forgets all about you, that’s what.
as willy wonka said, reverse that – supposed to say the belief that cooling means warming.
It’s actually worse than we thought:
Some have argued that the snow storms in the mid-atlantic are stronger because of the increase in water vapor in the atmosphere due to global warming. I don’t know what to make of that. The thing I have seen that does not support global warming is the cold that was experienced in Florida in January. Under a warming earth, we would expect the pole to equator difference in temperature to be smaller and therefore less cold intrusions into the south.
From the TIME article: About these two storms: The chance of that happening in the same winter is incredibly unlikely.
This statement appears to be from meteorologist Jeff Masters.
I’ll take issue with this. When global wind patterns shift and the polar front is south of its average location severe winter storms will appear along this stretch more frequently than would appear to be the normal if one just looks at the long term averages.
I believe this mistake stems from the common statement that climate is the average of weather. It is better to think of climates (note the s) as patterns of weather that move and change with the dynamics so often discussed here on WUWT. As Pielke Sr. states New England is certainly accustomed to these nor’easters. In an earlier post (see figure top), illustrates that the jet stream (as represented by the lower tropospheric temperature anomalies) was well south of its average position across the northern hemisphere. It is the polar jet stream which is where winter storms develop and intensify.
His reference to the polar jet stream and my wording ‘polar front’ are parts of the midlatitude weather systems.
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_sky/96424
heh heh…its even more ironic that when a hot and sweaty spell was used by Hanson to scare Congress, in ’88 (???) another weather blip, a cold one and as totally unrelated to climate as Hansons ‘isn’t it hot today’ speech was, has made Congress stop in its tracks.
Oh…the poetry of it.
A load of of manure gets plowed in and has no long term effect on the odour of the countryside. bushy 2010. Need ideas here on fun project. http://bushynews.com/
Sitting in my office a block away from the White House right now and it’s awful (high winds/blowing snow).
I’ve lived here all my life and we “normally” get a storm such as the 30″ blizzard last weekend every year around President’s Day…..last weekend’s 30″ storm was our typical, annual, President’s Day storm.
We had a pretty big snowstorm on December 19th and a storm today; however, today’s storm isn’t the snowfall amounts, it’s the wind……….
The snowstorms that we’ve received this season are not “abnormal”…………it’s just that Washington DC is a “southern” city and not accustomed to dealing with large amounts of snow as would Buffalo (for instance). These storms are no more abnormal then Oklahoma Tornados or Florida Hurricanes…….they reoccur almost like clockwork here. Also, the local weather pundits like to sensationalize.
The fact that a large portion of the snow removal equipment is out of commission due to government incompetence is the major problem here today.
I remember as a teenager, after staying up late and telling ghost stories, sitting in the dark, my friend and I convinced each other that the room was shrinking. Defying all logic, I was so scared I had to run and get my mother.
The human mind is funny, it can look at the randomness of weather and convince itself of all kinds of logic defying things. Weather has been the result of the wrath of gods, the results of chants (Rain, rain go away, come again another day!) and now the result of the benign gas CO2.
Silly people.
“Joe Romm (and now picked up by Time Magazine) that the east coast snowstorms are indicators of global warming.”
____________
The older you get the more things change. And Not.
There was a day that if TIME had it between the covers you could pretty much figure it was so. The same could have been said about most of America’s top periodicals and newspapers. Now we have propaganda rags in place of these once great sources of news pushing corporate agendas. I guess the thing that hurts the most is that some worthless Tyme-Wernar, Ink., Haverd MBA kept the name TIME and turned it into a pathetic joke.
One day soon all the print of yesteryear will be history. When the last TIME is published don’t run out and buy a copy for ‘old times sake’ you’ll only be throwing your money away. TIME died years ago.
“Weather is what will happen next weekend; climate is what will happen over the next decades and centuries. And while our ability to predict the former has become reasonably reliable, scientists are still a long way from being able to make accurate projections about the future of the global climate.”
To me climate is compendium of past regional weather data over past decades, centuries, millennia, and longer periods of time. Climate data (history) may be indicative of future weather over varying time periods. Am I wrong?
The AGWers and MSM have cleverly merged weather and climate into synonyms that are applied to fit whatever circumstances they choose. Proper definition and use of these terms is essential for refutation of AGW rhetoric.
Ok Smokey, you got me……….I was all ready to point out that these scares have been going on for years and I figured it out……….
Science: Another Ice Age?
Monday, Jun. 24, 1974
In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding terribly to the toll of famine victims… record rains in parts of the U.S., Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst flooding in centuries. In Canada’s wheat belt, a particularly chilly and rainy spring has delayed planting and may well bring a disappointingly small harvest…………….
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html#ixzz0f9xPtGuL
Just something to think about. This Danish programmer took the NOAA original temprerature data from weather stations accross the globe. He calculted a global average and made his code open source. Never a hockey stick and even a little cooling in a remarcable stable global climate. http://www.bestinclass.dk/index.php/2010/01/global-warming/
Another thing to follow is the composition of the Dutch IPCC delegation. (Warning Google translated from Dutch)
Today elsevier published that a full 109 of the 110 people of the government delegation were Alarmist. There were four prominent members of the environmental movement: Donald Pols of Friends of the earth, Steve Sawyer of Greenpeace, Arjette Stevens of Nature and Environment and Sven Teske of Greenpeace.
Steve Sawyer sailed on Greenpeace action ships and is described as one of the best lobbyists from Greenpeace. These four along with written recommendations for climate, which were taken by environment ministers in several countries – including Jacqueline Cramer (PvdA), who comes from the environmental movement.
The delegation (sent by the Dutch government, which also pays travel and subsistence) also included environmental and climate scientists who benefit from the commotion about global warming as the IPCC report describes controversial.
Main Suppliers were ECN (Netherlands Energy Research Center, propagandist of windmills and solar cells), RIVM (National Institute of Public Health and Environment) and the KNMI (Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute).
There were also four consultants in that earned money with the climate of giving advice, says Elsevier.
Elsevier is now checking the academic background of these people but many dont hold a PhD or even a Bachelor in a relevant study.
>>Romm left science for agiprop many years ago. He served in the Clinton Admin in the Dept of Energy. He liked the politics and hasn’t looked back.
Too true. And now he is the mouthpiece for the Soros funded Center for American Progress on all things climate related.
He’s not a scientist, he’s a left wing propagandist.