Hundreds of new cold and snow records set in the USA

New 2 day record December snowfall amount to the Minneapolis/St Paul area

While there have been a few high temperature records in the desert southwest and western Oregon, the majority of weather records in the USA this week have been for cold, snowfall, or rainfall. The biggest number of records have to do with the lowest maximum temperature.

click for interactive map

Here’s a summary of the weather records:

Record Events for Mon Dec 6, 2010 through Sun Dec 12, 2010
Total Records: 2002
Rainfall: 319
Snowfall: 320
High Temperatures: 71
Low Temperatures: 426
Lowest Max Temperatures: 767
Highest Min Temperatures: 99

Uncharacteristically for the Associated Press, they give this latest snowstorm the title of “monster”:

Rutgers snow lab has the current snow cover for 2010:

Last year, we seemed to have a bit more snow cover in the USA (and globally) at this time:

I think Rutgers is having a little joke by making snow cover “yellowish”.

Here’s a Public Information Statement (PIS) from the NWS in Minneapolis

Dec 10-11 Snowfall…New December Record

The December 10-11 snowstorm brought a new 2 day record December snowfall amount to the Minneapolis/St Paul area, and perhaps to other areas as well. The new record is 17.1 inches. This storm was bit unusual in that it was a Pacific type storm system. The snowfall amounts were in the category of what would be more typical of a storm moving out of the southwest U.S. toward the Mississippi valley.

This storm also ranks in the top 5 of the largest snowfalls in the Twin Cities. See the Minnesota State Climatology site for further details.

Here is the broad picture of the storm total snow.

PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TWIN CITIES/CHANHASSEN MN
800 PM CST SUN DEC 12 2010

...SNOWFALL TOTALS FROM THE WINTER STORM EVENT DEC 10-11...

THE TOTALS BELOW ARE SEPARATED INTO SNOW...AND ICE AND SLEET
CATEGORIES...THEN BY AMOUNT...AND ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE
FINAL AMOUNT FOR EACH LOCATION.

SNOW REPORTS LISTED BY AMOUNT

 INCHES  LOCATION                 ST  COUNTY           TIME
 ------  -----------------------  --  --------------   -------
 23.00   5 SE OSCEOLA             WI  POLK             0900 AM
 22.00   EAU CLAIRE               WI  EAU CLAIRE       0500 PM
         TELEVISION STATION WQOW.
 21.50   NEW MARKET               MN  SCOTT            0930 PM
 21.50   SHAKOPEE                 MN  SCOTT            0700 PM
 21.00   OAKDALE                  MN  WASHINGTON       0330 AM
 20.00   RED WING                 MN  GOODHUE          0800 AM
 20.00   MAPLEWOOD                MN  RAMSEY           0330 AM
 19.20   EAU CLAIRE               WI  EAU CLAIRE       0100 PM
 18.50   4 NNE MENOMONIE          WI  DUNN             0945 PM
 18.00   MENOMONIE                WI  DUNN             0800 AM
 18.00   EAST FARMINGTON          WI  POLK             0630 PM
 18.00   3 SSW BURNSVILLE         MN  DAKOTA           0615 PM
 18.00   2 W PRIOR LAKE           MN  SCOTT            0900 PM
 17.50   3 NW MINNEAPOLIS         MN  HENNEPIN         0100 PM
 17.40   LAKEVILLE                MN  DAKOTA           0900 PM
 17.20   WOODBURY                 MN  WASHINGTON       0900 AM
 17.20   1 W CARVER               MN  CARVER           1000 PM
 17.10   MINNEAPOLIS              MN  HENNEPIN         0130 AM
         MEASURED AT THE MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL AIRPORT
 17.00   EAU CLAIRE               WI  EAU CLAIRE       1100 AM
 17.00   2 N MENOMONIE            WI  DUNN             0630 PM
 16.50   SAVAGE                   MN  SCOTT            1130 PM
 16.30   HASTINGS                 MN  DAKOTA           0830 PM
 16.10   BLOOMINGTON              MN  HENNEPIN         0600 PM
 16.00   RIDGELAND                WI  DUNN             0100 PM
 16.00   DURAND                   WI  PEPIN            1030 PM
 15.50   CHANHASSEN               MN  CARVER           0130 AM
         MEASURED AT THE NWS OFFICE
 15.20   ST LOUIS PARK            MN  HENNEPIN         1030 PM
 15.00   1 SSW DELANO             MN  WRIGHT           0630 PM
 14.70   WACONIA                  MN  CARVER           0745 AM
 14.50   3 SSW WHITE BEAR LAKE    MN  RAMSEY           1030 PM
 14.20   STANLEY                  WI  CHIPPEWA         0930 AM
 13.70   LESTER PRAIRIE           MN  MCLEOD           0930 AM
 13.50   1 ESE CHASKA             MN  CARVER           0700 PM
 13.50   ELK MOUND                WI  DUNN             0700 PM
 13.00   STILLWATER               MN  WASHINGTON       1200 PM
 13.00   JIM FALLS                WI  CHIPPEWA         0930 AM
 12.50   NORTH BRANCH             MN  CHISAGO          1100 AM
 12.50   1 ENE CAMBRIDGE          MN  ISANTI           0630 PM
 12.00   FARIBAULT                MN  RICE             0900 PM
 11.50   ANDOVER                  MN  ANOKA            0145 AM
 11.00   HAUGEN                   WI  BARRON           1130 AM
 10.00   ST JAMES                 MN  WATONWAN         1230 PM
 10.00   CUMBERLAND               WI  BARRON           0730 AM
  9.50   NORTH BRANCH             MN  CHISAGO          0430 PM
  9.00   VESTA                    MN  REDWOOD          1230 PM
  8.00   MANKATO                  MN  BLUE EARTH       0715 PM
  7.00   4S ST CLOUD              MN  STEARNS          0630 PM
  6.00   WINTHROP                 MN  SIBLEY           0830 PM

Here is a Radar Replay during the time of some of the heavier snow (9 am to 3pm).

Snow Depth as of December 12

About these ads

185 thoughts on “Hundreds of new cold and snow records set in the USA

  1. No problem as the models allow for this , in fact those AGW models allow for anything you like. With the possible exception of ‘rain of frogs’ but I understand the ‘team’ is working on that one too.

  2. How about this for a record: 157 inches of snow already in Breckenridge and it’s still a week before winter starts.
    All Anthony’s rainy days are paying off in spades for us (thanks)

  3. The radio this morning welcomed us with “Sunny and Seven degrees (F).” This is in Mountain Home, AR. Everyone’s cars, porch thermometers, etc. all reflected singled digits for much of the earliest morn. NOAA? They reported the lowest it got was 10 (F) and only that for an hour. I guess NOAA is more accurate than every temperature gauge in town, to the warm, of course.

    I don’t know if 7 (F) is a record for my small town, but as stated in another of my previous comments – it is abnormally COLD for this clime. Even the old birds from Chicago and Wisconsin are admitting it’s indeed cold. And the “damn yankee” meter is never wrong. If they say it’s cold – it’s cold – even if it is a former Confederate State. (no offense to old birds or damn yankees)

  4. Uncharacteristically for the Associated Press, they give this latest snowstorm the title of “monster”:

    At the end of the video clip, look who is wedged in between 3 other “monster” video clips.

    Youtube works in mysterious ways

  5. Well, Gary, we’re having a heat wave down here in Mountain View, Ar. It was 9F on my thermometer early this morning, and even our cat has more sense than to go out in this. He stuck his head out, looked at me, and scurried under the nearest bed. He didn’t want to take any chances, I guess. Anyway, it’s the coldest morning I ever remember here for this date, and I’m sure we will see a slew of new low temp records, regardless of NOAA and its propencity to skew/manage the temps toward the warm side.

  6. While there have been a few high temperature records in the desert southwest and western Oregon, the majority of weather records in the USA this week have been for cold, snowfall, or rainfall.

    Just eyeballing the map, it looks like the eastern ⅓ to ½ of the United States is experiencing unusually low temps (thanks to an Arctic blast), while the rest is experiencing unusually high temps. The record highs are being set down in Mexico, though, where they don’t count. This pattern is predicted to continue for the next few days.

  7. Clearly it’s global warming! We’ve had loads of global warming here in the UK in the last couple of weeks.

  8. Here’s a quote from another “enlightened” climate “expert”…

    Expert: Snowfall set to get rarer

    Published Date:
    16 January 2010
    By Sion Donovan
    Education reporter

    A climate scientist has predicted the recent snowfall could be the last we see for a long time.

    Dr. Nick Pepin, from the University of Portsmouth, believes such long-lasting snow will become a rare event in the future.


    ‘And it will, on average, get rarer so people should enjoy it when it happens. Snow that sticks to the ground will be less frequent.’

    [sigh]

  9. In Florida the non-native manatees need FPL customer money to stay warm. Power plants good when they protect manatees so eco-nuts can beat boaters over the head with misleading statistics — http://www.sfltimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6013&Itemid=199

    When the eco0nuts found non-native species anchoring beaches and inlets, they cut the Australian pines down, which has then caused massive beach erosion .. it is debatable how the Austrailian pines seeds got to Flodia, most say they were washed up by the sea. So why protect the non-native manatees. Do you think we can stop the sun?

    Sheesh is it getting cold in SWFL, our inshore fish are being decimated, by the cold. The weather guys, the ones that avoid the tourist approved forecast and lies, are saying the next few days are the coldest so far, and winter is still a week away.

  10. Yes, but we have been hearing climate change is causing increased snowfall/precipitation too. Next, climate change will be responsible for cooler than average temperatures.

  11. It seems from the map shown by Anthony that there have been many record low maximum temperatures in parts of the midwest and southeastern US. The number of record temperatures is influenced by the density of stations, which, based on the map is very high in the areas where record low max temperatures have occurred. If we examined the area in which there were high versus low temperatures, I wonder if we would come the to the conclusion that the area where there were below normal temperatures in the US exceeded the area where there were record high temperatures. That would seem to me a more significant measure of what is happening than the numbers of weather stations.

    Despite the number of record lows in the US, the GISS Global Land-Sea temperature record for this November has an anomaly of .96 which is quite warm to say the least. In addition, the Year for Dec-Nov is the warmest year on record despite the fact that a fraction of the US is experiencing colder than normal temperatures .

    REPLY: Mr. Adler, at least TRY to have the appearance of knowing what you are talking about.

    ” November has an anomaly of .96 which is quite warm to say the least.” is false.

    According to the published GISS data itself, GISS GLOBAL Land-Ocean Temperature Index, which you can read here:

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

    2010 70 75 86 75 64 55 51 55 54 63 74***** ***** 65 69 75 53 63 2010
    Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year


    The November 2010 anomaly is .74 not .96

    In fact, .96 does not appear anywhere in the GISS record. – Anthony

  12. Greater snowfall is an indication of an accleration in the hydrological cycle…not a cooling of the earth. This finer point seems to be missed by some. The coolest place on earth is also the driest and gets very little actual snowfall…and that is Antarctica. When I see skeptics point to greater snowfall as any indication that AGW must not be happening it does make me chuckle a bit. It takes tremendous energy to move the mass of moisture in snow from the ocean to cover your driveway. As an acceleration of the hydrological cycle has long been predicted by GCM’s when looking at rising CO2 levels (as that is what the earth has done for millions of years when CO2 levels rise) and heavy record snowfalls are exactly that, I would suggest that some skeptics really take a look at all that is implied in that accleration.

  13. The urban heat effect is well demonstrated, And I have noted before the unlikely juxtaposition of hot and cold records. This most frequently happens in Texas and here we have it again.

  14. Well, something is going on. We’ve had a SECOND day of observable snowfall (little to no accumulation) in BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA. Snow in the deep South is a rarity, in and of itself, and even a single event, before Christmas (heck, even before the official first day of winter), is virtually unheard of. As the cold air mass passes over, we’re projected to go to 16 degrees overnight, thanks to no cloud cover behind the front.

  15. Gary says: (December 13, 2010 at 6:48 am)

    The radio this morning welcomed us with “Sunny and Seven degrees (F).” This is in Mountain Home, AR. Everyone’s cars, porch thermometers, etc. all reflected singled digits for much of the earliest morn. NOAA? They reported the lowest it got was 10 (F) and only that for an hour. I guess NOAA is more accurate than every temperature gauge in town, to the warm, of course.

    That agrees with data from Weather Underground, which as far as I’m aware is a commercial enterprise not associated with NOAA. They probably both get their data from the Ozark Regional Airport anyway. Maybe that’s far enough away from Mountain Home to account for the difference? I notice, for example, that the Marion County Regional Airport only had a low of 12°F, and that’s less than 10 miles further west.

  16. Here’s the forecast. Brrrrrr!
    Bitterly Cold Lows in Florida to End Midweek
    Intense Lake-Effect Snow
    National Weather Service Current Weather Warnings
    AND
    Arctic Cold Returning to the United Kingdom

    INDEPENDENT (UK) – 20 March 2000
    According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”….”Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.

  17. Maybe “the team” will have to get a bit more radical to crawl out from under all of this “warming”.

    I think their easiest route is – dust off all the records, zero all the “adjustments”, “rationalisations” and “homogenisations” and then call a megaconference (somewhere with a beach of course) with a working title;-

    “Back to the Seventies”

    subtitled:-

    “It’s MUCH Worse Than We Thought – We’re Going to Freeze to Death After All!”

  18. Chris says:
    December 13, 2010 at 7:42 am
    Clearly it’s global warming! We’ve had loads of global warming here in the UK in the last couple of weeks.

    There’s more on the way and we are not even at mid-December yet. I think January is usually the coldest month in the UK. ;O)

    Frank K. says:
    December 13, 2010 at 7:42 am
    Here’s a quote from another “enlightened” climate “expert”…
    …………………………
    Published Date: 16 January 2010
    ……………………….
    Dr. Nick Pepin, from the University of Portsmouth, believes such long-lasting snow will become a rare event in the future.

    ‘And it will, on average, get rarer so people should enjoy it when it happens. Snow that sticks to the ground will be less frequent.’

    Oh really!
    UK winter snow since 2007

    Evening Standard – 8 February 2007
    “Airports close as snow brings travel chaos to Britain”

    UPI – 2 December 2008
    “Early snow blanketed much of Britain Tuesday,…”

    Guardian – 2 February 2009
    “Transport hit as UK wakes to heaviest snow in decades

    BBC – 7 January 2010
    “Frozen Britain seen from above”

    Reuters – 13 January 2010
    “Britain, shivering through its coldest winter in three decades…”

    BBC – 25 November 2010
    “The earliest widespread snowfall for 17 years has gripped many parts of the UK.”

    With more to come. 10 years ago the same prediction which nature has shown to be false. 4 years of widespread UK snow in a row is not a rare or exciting event. Well, not for pensioners at least. :o(

  19. Hmmmm. Be interesting to see what the UAH temperature anomaly is for December. Maybe it will be low enough to temper talk of 2010 being the third warmest year on record? That would be just dandy!

  20. It is getting so cold here in the UK that we need to know how we can ramp up our CO2 output fast to try to alleviate the risks to the elderly and the frail. Suggestions to Chris Huhne (rhymes with loon) at chris@chrishuhne.org.uk whilst he recovers from his huge but largely unreported success in Cancun.

  21. There is apparently a very large High pressure system sitting over the SW US, pushing the arctic type weather to the east…where it can stay…heheh

  22. R Gates, “As an acceleration of the hydrological cycle has long been predicted by GCM’s when looking at rising CO2 levels (as that is what the earth has done for millions of years when CO2 levels rise) and heavy record snowfalls are exactly that, I would suggest that some skeptics really take a look at all that is implied in that accleration.”

    I took you up on that offer and looked into snowfall records for Minneapolis/St Paul: http://climate.umn.edu/doc/twin_cities/alltimep.htm. I don’t see any records being broken lately. The theory I would offer for all of this snow: it’s Minnesota in December, it snows.

  23. Pardon me, to ammend to the above, the record december snowfall we just saw in Mn/St Paul is not greater than the record for amount of snowfall in two days, albeit still a record.

  24. R. Gates says:
    “The coolest place on earth is also the driest and gets very little actual snowfall…”

    What drier than the Sahara?

    Currently in the UK our wind generation capacity is about 5,000 MW, and the wind turbines are generating 189 MW, about 0.3% of our total demand, about 0.04% of their capability. How on earth can we continue to invest in such a useless and expensive technology.?

  25. I’m really surprise a 17″ snowfall is a record in Minneapolis. 17″ wouldn’t even a record for most parts of North Carolina…

  26. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am

    Great. So, tell us where all that cold comes from.
    Maybe the warmest ever Arctic where the heat pumps out to space?
    Don’t look now, but the barn door is open, and the next step in the sequence is a N. Hem. repeat of what happened last June/July in the S. Hem.

  27. R Gates. Yes, it is possible to have extra heat evaporate more water and get more snow. However, for years and years, and even displayed in the comments on this page the “experts” have said over and over that winters snows will become a thing of the past.

    The reason more people are becoming skeptical is because the “experts” this year are demanding that the snows are proof of global warming. I would bet eleventy billion dollars that if there was no snow or cold this year the “experts” and you included would be declaring that the lack of snow was proof of global warming. Just like the drought in Austrailia was proof of global warming, and now the lack of drought in Austrailia is also proof of global warming.

    No matter what happens anywhere on earth it is always proof of global warming…even if that proof is exactly the opposite of what they claimed was proof just a few years before.

    I will respect the opinion of global warming experts, if they can provide even one kind of weather anywhere on earth that could be used to disprove global warming.

  28. Hoever, over the last 11 months, record high and record high lows have outnumbered record lows about 3:1. But I agree–right now much of the USA is having cold winter weather.

  29. “R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:21 am
    Greater snowfall is an indication of an accleration in the hydrological cycle…not a cooling of the earth. This finer point seems to be missed by some. The coolest place on earth is also the driest and gets very little actual snowfall…and that is Antarctica. When I see skeptics point to greater snowfall as any indication that AGW must not be happening it does make me chuckle a bit. It takes tremendous energy to move the mass of moisture in snow from the ocean to cover your driveway. As an acceleration of the hydrological cycle has long been predicted by GCM’s when looking at rising CO2 levels (as that is what the earth has done for millions of years when CO2 levels rise) and heavy record snowfalls are exactly that, I would suggest that some skeptics really take a look at all that is implied in that accleration.”
    R Gates is an expert and I am not, but frankly my take on “Man Made Global Warming” is simple. The snow should fall as rain here in Scotland as a result of AGW. CO2 is approaching 400ppm. Mr Gates, when will Dr David Viner’s prediction “within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”….”Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” come true? I am fed up showelling snow and because of frost day/night I cannot shift the ice either. Used to have mild winters here when there was less CO2 in the air. I need relief from this particular version of “Climate Disruption”. Don’t mind more rain, but we are promised more snow and cold from Thursay. Brrr.

  30. Elizabeth says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:15 am
    R Gates, “As an acceleration of the hydrological cycle has long been predicted by GCM’s when looking at rising CO2 levels (as that is what the earth has done for millions of years when CO2 levels rise) and heavy record snowfalls are exactly that, I would suggest that some skeptics really take a look at all that is implied in that accleration.”

    I took you up on that offer and looked into snowfall records for Minneapolis/St Paul: http://climate.umn.edu/doc/twin_cities/alltimep.htm. I don’t see any records being broken lately. The theory I would offer for all of this snow: it’s Minnesota in December, it snows
    ______

    While it’s nice to track our local weather, if you’re serious about tracking the acceleration of the hydrological cycle on a global basis then you should keep a keen eye out for heavy precipitation events (record setting) across the globe…extreme downpours, rains, and snowfalls in the winter. Some of the latest research being done on this can be found in this story:

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/10/global-warming-river-flows-oceans-climate-disruption.html

    The acceleration of the hydrological cycle is the way the earth has provided a negative feedback to control the levels of CO2 for millions of years. CO2=more heat=greater evaporation=great rainfall & snowfall in winter=greater weathering of rock to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

    The only issue now is that normally CO2 hasn’t increased by 40% in just a few hundred years, so exactly how this will affect the natural negative feedback mechanism of rock weathering isn’t known.

  31. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am
    “I would also suggest that some people really look at the data related to actual temperature of the N. Hemisphere during the past month:

    http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/maproom/.Global/.Atm_Temp/Anomaly.html

    More heat=greater evaporation=larger snowfall in winter & greater rainfall in summer.”

    The important facts about this great snowfall, in North America, are that the cold air mass 1) has arrived much earlier than usual, 2) is way colder than usual, and 3) is far more extensive than usual, extending all the way to Brownsville, Texas and Miami, Florida. In Florida, we are experiencing what amounts to a winter emergency. We do not possess the kind of heating equipment that is needed for tonight. I hope it is obvious to you why we do not possess the needed heating equipment.

  32. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am

    I would also suggest that some people really look at the data related to actual temperature of the N. Hemisphere during the past month:…

    Do you think the average freezing American or European give a dog’s fart about the ‘actual’ temperatures in the N. Hemisphere? They are struggling with reality i.e. paying high energy bills this winter, old people dying of hypothermia, Norway record cold etc. Your appeals to their reason will fail. Seeing is believing not badly placed thermometors and extrapolations from Warmist scientists. Trust gone long ago my friend.

  33. oldgifford says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:21 am
    R. Gates says:
    “The coolest place on earth is also the driest and gets very little actual snowfall…”

    What drier than the Sahara?

    Currently in the UK our wind generation capacity is about 5,000 MW, and the wind turbines are generating 189 MW, about 0.3% of our total demand, about 0.04% of their capability. How on earth can we continue to invest in such a useless and expensive technology.?

    ______

    The issue of technology is somewhat off-topic from the general accerlation of the hydrological cycle caused by increased CO2, but I agree with you that expensive technology to reduce greenhouse emissions and expensive government programs is not the best route to take. I think small is better and more efficient and I think the idea of building smaller, greener homes and having small energy generation technology that takes people off the grid is much better than a bunch of large, expensive wind farms. The age of small scale green and personal (home) power generation is here and it doesn’t involve Big government with big programs to make it happen.

  34. As I look at the record highs(Just a quick perusal,) I noticed that they aren’t smashed, but given the Urban heat Island effect, and thermometer locations , I noticed a lot were set in the late 40’s and 50’s -at the beginning of the Last PDO switch. I realize that we can control the weather, the tides and the sea levels. But is this a bit curious? hmmm?
    Oh, and if the snow is the Warm-what about albedo? -reflect on that…

  35. “R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:21 am
    “reater snowfall is an indication of an accleration in the hydrological cycle…not a cooling of the earth. This finer point seems to be missed by some.”

    Talk about someone who misses a point or two! The amount of snowfall is not the big deal. The big deal is the timing, extent, coldness of the air mass. In fact, the lack of significant snowfall south of St. Louis is proof positive that there was a tiny amount of moisture in the air. So, where is this extra moisture you are trumpeting?

  36. Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:45 am
    R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am
    “I would also suggest that some people really look at the data related to actual temperature of the N. Hemisphere during the past month:

    http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/maproom/.Global/.Atm_Temp/Anomaly.html

    More heat=greater evaporation=larger snowfall in winter & greater rainfall in summer.”

    The important facts about this great snowfall, in North America, are that the cold air mass 1) has arrived much earlier than usual, 2) is way colder than usual, and 3) is far more extensive than usual, extending all the way to Brownsville, Texas and Miami, Florida. In Florida, we are experiencing what amounts to a winter emergency. We do not possess the kind of heating equipment that is needed for tonight. I hope it is obvious to you why we do not possess the needed heating equipment.

    ________

    There is, in essence, a huge “freezer door” opened right from the Arctic to the E. United States. Normally the Arctic will have several closed low pressure systems that hold most of the cold up there with only an occasional outbreak and that outbreak will only usually affect the Northern U.S. The large strong high pressure system over Cananda combined with the low pressure over the eastern U.S. is that “opened freezer door” sucking that air right from the Arctic. Now, on the flip side, the temperatures in the Arctic are at normal to above normal across the whole of the Arctic, just as you’d expect to happen if you left your own freezer door open– it would be above average inside the freezer!

    What does all this have to do with AGW? That’s the million dollar question, but there are those who are looking at it. You might want to read this article from this summer:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=12160105&tqkw=&tqshow=&tqkw=&=tqshow

    Odd things are happening with pressure gradient over the Arctic and it may be related to both the lower than average sea ice and the bottom line is that it may increase the chance of cold outbreaks to points south of the arctic in the future…as counter-intuitive as this seems.

  37. I would like to see Al Gore sued for breach of promise. For the past 20 years I’ve been waiting for death of winter, preferably to coincide with my retirement. I’ve seen no evidence that things are getting any better.

  38. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:42 am
    Elizabeth says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:15 am
    While it’s nice to track our local weather, if you’re serious about tracking the acceleration of the hydrological cycle on a global basis then you should keep a keen eye out for heavy precipitation events (record setting) across the globe…extreme downpours, rains, and snowfalls in the winter. Some of the latest research being done on this can be found in this story:

    So, now you are saying that these local phenomena that YOU HAVE BEEN CITING do not matter, only the global cycle matters? Then why were you citing local phenomena?

    By the way, is there some reason to believe that there is a global hydrological cycle? To me, that sounds like a global cloud cycle or global humidity cycle, and I know that neither of those exist. I am asking for an answer in your very own words. Do not refer me to an article. I am not your student.

  39. oldgifford says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:21 am
    R. Gates says:
    “The coolest place on earth is also the driest and gets very little actual snowfall…”

    What drier than the Sahara?

    ________
    Actually, both of them are classified as deserts, and the interior of Antarctica is even more dry than than Sahara…

    A Desert is defined as a region that has less than 254 mm (10 in) of annual rainfall or precipitation. Antarctica can be classified as a desert by this definition. In the interior of the continent the average annual precipitation (in *equivalent of water) is only about 50 mm (about 2 in), less than the Sahara.
    Here a useful link to learn more about the amazing Desert that is Antarctica:

    http://tiny.cc/9n0x3

    In the bigger climate picture, Cold=dry, not wet, and has for millions of years on earth.

  40. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:02 am
    Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:45 am
    R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am
    There is, in essence, a huge “freezer door” opened right from the Arctic to the E. United States. Normally the Arctic will have several closed low pressure systems that hold most of the cold up there with only an occasional outbreak and that outbreak will only usually affect the Northern U.S. The large strong high pressure system over Cananda combined with the low pressure over the eastern U.S. is that “opened freezer door” sucking that air right from the Arctic. Now, on the flip side, the temperatures in the Arctic are at normal to above normal across the whole of the Arctic, just as you’d expect to happen if you left your own freezer door open– it would be above average inside the freezer!

    Sir/M’am, put down the dope pipe. Get a nap.

  41. Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:10 am

    To R. Gates:

    By the way, is there some reason to believe that there is a global hydrological cycle? To me, that sounds like a global cloud cycle or global humidity cycle, and I know that neither of those exist. I am asking for an answer in your very own words. Do not refer me to an article. I am not your student.

    ___
    I’m not sure what you mean by global cloud cycle or global humidity cycle, but abolutely there are ocean and atmospheric cycles that affect the entire global (ENSO, PDO, etc) If the hydrological cycle is accelerating on a global basis, as appears to be the case by the latest research, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/10/global-warming-river-flows-oceans-climate-disruption.html

    Then yes, you could say there is a global hydrological cycle in the sense that more precipitation will be evaporated from oceans worldwide and falling on land worldwide. This is the exact method of negative feedback the planet has used to balance CO2 levels off for millions of years and there is no reason to think this time would be dfferent. The only difference now is the fact that CO2 levels have risen far more quickly (virtually instantly from a geological perpective) and it is not clear how the normal acceleration of the hydrological cycle will respond. (i.e., it looks like it is accelerating, but what other things will result from this large and rapid spike in CO2?)

  42. Since “eadler” usually doesn’t notice or chooses not to notice corrections, I’m point it out that I’ve made a significant correction to his false comment above. He claims GISS has November Land Ocean Index at .96 which is totally bogus.

  43. Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:27 am
    R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:02 am
    Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:45 am
    R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:58 am
    There is, in essence, a huge “freezer door” opened right from the Arctic to the E. United States. Normally the Arctic will have several closed low pressure systems that hold most of the cold up there with only an occasional outbreak and that outbreak will only usually affect the Northern U.S. The large strong high pressure system over Cananda combined with the low pressure over the eastern U.S. is that “opened freezer door” sucking that air right from the Arctic. Now, on the flip side, the temperatures in the Arctic are at normal to above normal across the whole of the Arctic, just as you’d expect to happen if you left your own freezer door open– it would be above average inside the freezer!

    Sir/M’am, put down the dope pipe. Get a nap
    ______

    Thanks for that Sam. My description is accurate, but you’ve reminded me that I need to go out a do a bit of Christmas shopping as I enjoy this unusually warm December day in Denver.

  44. While there have been a few high temperature records in the desert southwest and western Oregon, the majority of weather records in the USA this week have been for cold….

    I’m not sure of the weather station density from http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/ , but I suspect it’s a lot lower in the southwest than in the southeast. Still, it’s a decent outbreak for the southeast. Rather annoying actually, it was 50°F when I got up this morning in New Hampshire. Oh well, at least the ground thawed so I could plant my snowstake.

    Snowfall to date for me this season – 0.8″. Our turn will come.

  45. R. Gates:
    “What does all this have to do with AGW? Thats the million dollar question, but there are those who are looking at it.”

    Actually, it’s the billion dollar question, and I would rather that my tax money NOT look at it. There are many, more urgent matters that require our attention (e.g. national debt, hunger, disease, to name a few).

    PS
    I am totally OK with funding climate research with private money…you know, George Soros, Greenpeace, WWF, UAW, Teamsters, BP, R. Gate’s money, etc. …

  46. RE: R Gates

    “…It takes tremendous energy to move the mass of moisture in snow from the ocean to cover your driveway…”

    It took even more energy to move ice a mile thick, down to the latitude of NYC. Does this make the past ice age a proof of global warming?

    However I do think you make some good points, regarding how poorly understood the energy budget of the earth is. Vast amounts of energy is shifted from place to place to place, and a single big storm captures and releases gigantic amounts of latent energy as water shifts from gas to fluid to ice, and then back again, raising the water three times as high as Mount Everest and then dropping it down again. Simply attempting back-of-the-envelope calculations of energy gains and losses on earth can make your head spin. Likely the best route is to skip all the amazing things energy does here on earth, and instead to simply position a satellite or ten up in space, and measure incoming energy as opposed to energy going out.

    The current AO is pretty amazing. It is interesting no matter what it is caused by. It is like a rubber band stretched as far as it can be stretched, and when the pattern “breaks” the new pattern will catch many by surprise, I think. And what will the new pattern be? Ah, that is the question, isn’t it!?

  47. This just in: It snows in the midwest in the winter.

    Amazing science being done!

    REPLY: This also just in, WUWT reports on weather as well as climate, as does the Associated Press and thousands of other new outlets. Read the masthead.

    At least TRY to have some convincing snark without parroting Romm, otherwise please visit the FAIL blog where your level of commentary might be more appropriate. – Anthony

  48. Pops says:
    December 13, 2010 at 6:36 am

    Rocky Balboa, here’s the very link for you:

    Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.
    ———————————————-
    Thanks for that. Seen it before but that’s exactly what I need to print off and pin up in the coffee area at work. Anything to try and wake people up to the fact that we’re all getting scammed, or at least that the so-called ‘experts’ we have rammed down our throats by the BBC all the time know sh*t. That’s getting printed off tonight and pinned up tomorrow.

    Failed predictions are great. Al Gore’s got it coming good, over the ‘five years’ arctic ice claim he made two or three years ago.

  49. Proof of Global Warming: How to get it…
    Get yourself a fifth of 100 Proof Kentucky Bourbon or other similar distill, drink up, and you shall feel globally warmed all over.
    Neither rain, nor sleet, nor snow, flood, hurricane, tornado, Arctic blast, drought or Barbecue Summer shall deter you.
    Just remember to contract a designated driver before you fall off the wagon.

  50. Ric Werme says:

    “Snowfall to date for me this season – 0.8″. Our turn will come.”

    I think the West’s turn is coming soon. and New England is downwind…

  51. Heard on the radio the other day…

    The Temperature in Anchorage is now 17(f) while it is 4(f) here at our studios. I had to laugh, the studios are about 3 miles from the airport. I was about half a mile from the airport at the time and my truck thermometer read 2f.

  52. no se puede cantar victoria
    hay que esperar los proximos años haber si no se sigue calentando el planeta
    para estar seguro de que nos encaminamos a una edad de hielo

  53. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:24 am
    In the bigger climate picture, Cold=dry, not wet, and has for millions of years on earth.

    That only works if there are 2 states to climate.
    There are 4.

  54. R. Gates, go0d comment about not needing goverment. BTW, if you speed up the hydrologic cycle, and produce more snow, more rain, then you are getting more clouds. Clouds always reduce the SWR entering the oceans. The oceans are primarily warmed by SWR. The feedback from the oceans can takes time to manifest in an atmosphere warmed by GHG,

  55. R. Gates is always good for a laugh or two and he always reminds me of the knight in the “Holy Grail” that has all of his limbs cut off, “Merely a flesh wound.”

    “Those record cold temperatures are really predicted by global warming theory.” NOT.

  56. “CO2=more heat=greater evaporation=great rainfall & snowfall in winter=greater weathering of rock to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.”

    R. Gates please demonstrate your proof of this statement. Please no links just your proof. Some math. Some physics. Some chemistry. Not just words. Especially the more heat part.

  57. Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:01 am
    Talk about someone who misses a point or two! The amount of snowfall is not the big deal. The big deal is the timing, extent, coldness of the air mass.

    So it’s cold where you are. And the British Isles, and Scandinavia. But did you notice the red and yellow dots on the map scattered across the entire Western US vs purple and blue in the Southeast?

  58. R Gates,

    Your argument that warmer temperatures lead to increased snowfall is valid in very few places on earth. Your central Antarctic desert for example. Warmer air would lead to increased snowfall there simply because the air could hold more moisture.

    However, you have implied that increased SNOWFALL in other areas of the world are a result of the same effect. You could not be more wrong. Warming and an increased hydrological cycle will not cause more SNOWFALL in areas that are ordinarily ABOVE freezing. Increased rainfall, yes, you might be able to make that argument. But please, there is no argument that allows for snowfall in areas that are ordinarily too warm for snow due to WARMING.

    [Snip] Fine argument, no need for the ad hom. ~tallmod

  59. @Frank K, December 13, 2010 at 7:42 am.
    I visited the link you provided and found this directly under the headline:
    “A climate scientist has predicted the recent snowfall could be the last we see for a long time. Dr Nick Pepin, from the University of Portsmouth, believes such long-lasting snow will become a rare event in the future.
    Dr Pepin, who’s been running a weather station on the roof of the geography department since 1995, said: ‘What we had over the past week was unusual because the snow stayed.”

    Does anything sort of catch your eye in this?
    Google Maps “Lion Terrace, Portsmouth, England” to see what the surrounding environment looks like.

  60. During the 2010 magma intrusions at Eyjafjallajökull, 100 million cubic meters of ice melted during the eruption. Much of that was converted to steam. Here is an attempt to picture the size of a cubic meter: Eruption rates at volcanoes

    http://blogs.agu.org/magmacumlaude/2010/11/20/average-lava-fluxes-at-volcanoes/

    Sharp temperature gradients + particulate = what goes up eventually comes back down.

    Merapi wasn’t big enough to significantly cool the area around the equator like a VEI-6 Pinatubo perturbed globally. 1916 was La Nina followed by an even stronger one in 1917. Big volcano year, Cerro Azul (VEI 5+). Hope that doesn’t happen again. The VEI index is logarithmic scale,

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithmic_scale?wasRedirected=true

    as an example, it takes 100 VEI-4 to equal one massive VEI-6. That can sometimes even penetrate all the way through the stratosphere, especially near the poles.
    The stratosphere is situated between about 10 km (6 miles) 31,680 ft and 50 km (31 miles) altitude above the surface at moderate latitudes, while at the poles it starts at about 8 km (5 miles) 26,400 ft altitude.

  61. Hmmmmmm, I understand that there might (should) be a hydrological cycle. And I agree that it should lead to an increase in precipitation. The point I think is that the precipitation will be water in the liquid form when the temperature is within the “normal” range for the date in the SE. The problem is that the temp isn’t in the “normal” range.

    R. Gates there is not argument about the hydrological cycle there is one, whether it is increasing has not been determined as yet. Perhaps we should wait a few years and complete one of the full cycles and make that determination. As for me here in NE Alabama it is very cold with today’s high about 30 degrees below the climatic norm for the date leading to the precipitation being in the solid state rather than the liquid.

    Nor argument from me it did precipitate and it is cold. Tonight it is going to be very cold also probably if the forecast is correct record setting 9f for my particular location. Glad the hydrological cycle will be dry tonight.

    Bill Derryberry

  62. During the 2010 magma intrusions of Eyjafjallajökull, 100 million cubic meters of ice melted, way more than the same intrusion in 1999-2000. Thus more snow, also 2000 was a La Nina year.

  63. jakers says:
    December 13, 2010 at 11:36 am
    Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:01 am

    “So it’s cold where you are. And the British Isles, and Scandinavia. But did you notice the red and yellow dots on the map scattered across the entire Western US vs purple and blue in the Southeast?”

    I hate to get technical on you, but if you will Google “us chill map” and read the temperatures, not the lower wind-chill numbers, you will see that the record highs are items such as 73F in San Diego. Now, mind you, I know San Diego very well and I have family there that I am talking to now, so I recognize that 73F really is blistering hot in a place that is reliably 70F all year around; however, treating that kind of temperature as a record high and comparing it to the disastrous lows in Florida or Texas is LAUGHABLE and desperate. You just burned up your credibility for this year. “R. Gates” has managed to burn up his/her credibility forever.

    Permit me to explain. In a normal winter in Central Florida, there will be three to five days in which the temperature falls below 32F for a period of one to two hours. (Yes, you read me right. The ordinary person in Central Florida will never see ice on the ground.) Tonight, the temperature is going below 32F just after sunset and will not recover until well after dawn. For Florida, that is comparable to taking a direct hit from a tsunami. Once again, the citrus industry will be pushed further south. No one should compare that to 73F in San Diego.

  64. It looks like Wisconsin got dumped on harder then Minnesota but it matters little unless you are the guy shoveling it. Ah, fond memories of a boy with his sled, living in south central Wisconsin. (that’s the 50’s for you younger folks) The one thing we knew about was snow the other was an almost annual promise of at least one snow day when the school buses didn’t run. I know lots of modern kids who have never had a snow day so you could go sledding in the sunshine of mid day. At least Mother Nature is making sure my grandchildren have that experience.

  65. The green Ireland got white two weeks ago and the snow is still here. It’s just too cold to melt fully. No warming here. It started 2007 and since then Ireland has snow every year. This year for the second time. My kids didn’t have snow every year and only for a day or two and now, after they are young adults, they get the change to experience it every year for a week or more. That’s not fair.
    “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” <<< they know it now!!!

  66. Strange: the map shows a red dot (High Temp) in South Colorado, right where we are, but it has been very cold here in the end of November, and kind of normal in December, no unusual warmth to speak of. What’s up with that?

  67. La Nina, negative PDO, Sun still a bit quiet. So … could just be noise. But I always like to ask the rhetorical question, what would the end of the interglacial look like? And what would be the result?

  68. So it’s cold where you are. And the British Isles, and Scandinavia. But did you notice the red and yellow dots on the map scattered across the entire Western US vs purple and blue in the Southeast?

    Yes, we can work out that average temperatures are normalish. We’re not stupid.

    The point is that we are meant to be in the grip of the “hottest year evah”.

    At such a time there will still be cold days. Even very cold days. But having a large range of places having record lows does not fit.

    If we agree that the temperatures for the end of the year are within fairly normal bounds, then the “hottest year evah” is a non-starter.

    The sceptics don’t need to show that the world is abnormally cold. Ordinary will do. It is up to the AGW to put record lows and “hottest ever” in a consistent framework.

  69. Your veggies will also suffer … We had crop damage in SWFL earlier, but they are now saying it could go to severe in the next few days. While we love to laugh at the global warming hysterics, I don’t think people pay enough attention to what the cold is doing to food crops worldwide … As in yikes.

  70. R. Gates says: “In the bigger climate picture, Cold=dry, not wet, and has for millions of years on earth.”

    And I could say that cooling causes the heavy rain/snowfall followed by the future cold desert dry air when ocean evaporation decreases. Harder to live when its cold and with no food crops from being cold and dry.

  71. Last winter I was in Crystal River Florida when it was 15F. The local radio stations were talking about “Gulf-effect” snow. I think they had just coined that phrase. Any talk of Gulf-effect snow down that way so far this year?

  72. Damn Di-Hydrogen Oxide.

    Precipitating out of the atmosphere (Leeching), coating everything in a film that retards the practical use of everything from sidewalks to Jumbo Jets.

    When will this madness ever end!

    Move Al Gore to the Antarctic Peninsula, and all this goes away.

    /Sarc – OFF.

  73. For those who’d like a direct display of the difference cooler temps can make on less moisture being pumped around the hydrological cycle, it is interesting to look at this graph of anomalously dry areas of the world for the past few months:

    http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/maproom/.Global/.Precipitation/Anomaly.html

    And then compare it to the area of interest in the current La Nina:

    http://sharaku.eorc.jaxa.jp/cgi-bin/amsr/elni2/elni2.cgi?lang=e

    What you’ll notice quite predictably is that the warmer than normal areas show wetter than normal conditions, and the cooler than normal areas show lower than normal precipitation, reinforcing the general rule of climate that cool=dry and warm=wet, as this is the foundation of the hydrological cycle.

  74. As put forward by R. Gates that the water cycle is accelerating because of AGW.

    I propose that measuring global warming with thermometers with all it’s inherent faults to hundredths of a degree is basically unsound.

    Using R.Gates logic it would be better to measure this AGW in inches and feet,
    this would be a more accurate test. The only problem I fore see is that the warmists would revert to clause one if precipitation did not match their theory.[sarc off]

  75. “In the bigger climate picture, Cold=dry, not wet, and has for millions of years on earth.”

    In the Denver area, this is what’s known as “too cold to snow”, a frequent occurrence in January and why we like humidifiers on our furnaces.

  76. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:33 am
    If the hydrological cycle is accelerating on a global basis, as appears to be the case by the latest research
    ======================================================
    Gates, I’m not sure I can follow your train of thought on this one.

    If temperatures rising drives the HyC, and causes it to speed up.
    The HyC puts CO2 into the atmosphere.
    If the HyC is speeding up, then it’s putting more and more CO2 into the atmosphere.

    As temperatures increase, the HyC speeds up, and the HyC puts more CO2 into the atmosphere.

    Which is saying that CO2 follows temperature rise.
    How much CO2 is the HyC contributing? and how much is man made?

  77. R. Gates says:
    Greater snowfall is an indication of an accleration in the hydrological cycle…

    So far, so good. But what does that acceleration mean? It means more heat is LEAVING the planet. We’re cooling. The heat that was added to the oceans during the absolutely normal warm half of the PDO cycle from the mid ’70s to 1998 or so has now got to get off the planet. It does this by evporating water from the oceans, that condenses at altitude (dumping a load of heat) and falling as rain and snow.

    Take a look at the ocean surface of the mid Pacific. That’s a darned cold anomaly phase. It’s not warmer in the world, it’s colder. And a load of heat is evaporating from the cceans and cooling the surface, then condensing and falling bringing more cold to the land.

    not a cooling of the earth. This finer point seems to be missed by some.

    And other just have no clue…

    The coolest place on earth is also the driest and gets very little actual snowfall…and that is Antarctica.

    Another truth snuck in to mislead the naive into a belief in the whole pot of stew. Yes, if you are dramatically below freezing, it’s hard to have water in the air. Completely pointless factoid, though. The oceans are not below freezing…

    So we’re back to the water driven heat engine model:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/11/which-way-to-the-feedback/

    where you can EITHER warm the ‘heat in’ end or COOL the ‘heat out’ end. And, might I make a tiny little suggestion? Go look out the window. The “cold end” is getting colder. A LOT colder. (And we’ve only just begun. We’ve got a couple of decades of this ahead of us and the ocean lags by about 6 to 12 years…)

    When I see skeptics point to greater snowfall as any indication that AGW must not be happening it does make me chuckle a bit.

    Then get ready to be rolling on the floor laughing your *** off as your eggnog squirts out your nose…

    It takes tremendous energy to move the mass of moisture in snow from the ocean to cover your driveway.

    Absolutely true. Said energy LEAVING the ocean, being taken to altitude by the convection process, then condensing into nice clouds and DUMPING that heat, which then leaves to space.

    There is a very nice picture of it happening here:

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/07/heat-rises-who-knew/

    As an acceleration of the hydrological cycle has long been predicted by GCM’s

    Oh Puh-lease. What have they NOT predicted? It’s going to get warmer, but we’re going to have a little ice age; and we’re going to have droughts, except the hydrological cycle will be bringing floods.

    Look, this is just a load of … (self snip)… MODELS are not PROOF of ANYTHING. They are human constructed FANTASIES. I’ve run a supercomputer doing modeling (including a few weeks of runs for a Stanford guy getting his Ph.D. doing cloud models). I can make a model give you any answer you like. That doesn’t mean it has any truth in it at all. Models are best used “to inform our ignorance”, not as any statement about what is or is not real. Learn that. It matters.

    when looking at rising CO2 levels (as that is what the earth has done for millions of years when CO2 levels rise)

    Except when it doesn’t… like when we had that nasty little Ice Age with dramatically higher CO2 levels. Oh, and that unfortuante point about CO2 changing 800 years AFTER the temperature changes… Effect always precedes cause in the Global Warming post-normal ‘science’.

    and heavy record snowfalls are exactly that, I would suggest that some skeptics really take a look at all that is implied in that accleration.

    And I’d suggest you go take a long hike. Out into a large field of snow. Put on some snow shoes and take a pack. Proceed until you run out of food. Then hug a bear. I think at the end of that process you will find two things:

    1) Snow is cold. More snow is more cold. Snow falls from the sky. Snow got cold way up in the sky in the clouds; it did not rise from the ocean as snow. This represents heat dumped to the sky, and now freezing your toosh.

    2) Bears are fond of “meat cicles” and don’t mind if they are frozen. Bears are equal opportunity employers and do not care if you like them or not. They will eat all commers on an equal basis. Polar bears will travel hundreds of miles to inform you of this. Bears are not your fluffy friends. “Hug a bear for world peace. Do it ‘For the Children’. Please, the world is depending on YOU!”

    For an advanced course, you could then postulate that to get all that water into the sky would take a load of heat. That heat leaves the oceans as the water evaporates. Evaporting water lowers the surface temperature (thus the cold phase PDO and very cold anomaly center of the Pacific. It takes about 18 years for water in the central Pacific to reach Alaska, so ‘watch this space’ for the next decade+ as the cold spreads out). So in your scenario, the center of the Pacific would need to be warming a LOT to power all that snow as the world warms. It’s not, it’s getting colder. The heat is leaving the planet and not being replenshed fast enough as the sun is taking a brief nap…

    But don’t worry, you can keep making those same tired arguments. You’ll have ever fewer followers, though. As every year from here on out we’re sliding further down that Razor Blade Of Climate Life called the PDO Cold Phase. Enjoy the ride.

  78. SteveSadlov says:
    December 13, 2010 at 1:37 pm
    “La Nina, negative PDO, Sun still a bit quiet. So … could just be noise. But I always like to ask the rhetorical question, what would the end of the interglacial look like? And what would be the result?”

    There is a national park northwest of Boulder CO. If you are in the basin, where the tourist villages are, you can see a snowstorm on the peaks and that storm is there almost year around. At the end of the interglacial, the permanent snowstorm comes down the mountain. Glaciers are piles of snow. The areas of Canada that are covered with snow permanently will be extended southward. That is how the glacier reached Kansas City. It is all very simple really, and it is all weather.

  79. We need to refocus the topic. Talking about snowfall is fun and all, but the weather event that we are suffering today is not snowfall. The problem in most of the USA is not snow. It is an air mass that is unusually large, unusually cold, unusually extensive, and unusually early. To make matters worse, this is three years running that the USA has suffered such an air mass, though this particular one is by far the worst. In Florida, this is the third year running that we have suffered such an air mass and we expect to suffer from unusual cold for three more months, as we did in ’09 and ’10. The normal daily high in Central Florida is 75F and we have not enjoyed that normal for two years. The fact that Warmists have failed to address this matter shows so very clearly that they refuse to discuss the elephant in the room. The last time something of this severity occurred was 1974, a year that the citrus industry retreated 50 miles south and James Hansen predicted the imminent end of the interglacial.

  80. R. Gates says:
    In the bigger climate picture, Cold=dry, not wet, and has for millions of years on earth.

    Another partial truth.

    What this ignores is, among other things, TIMING and LOCATION.

    There are places where this relationship is reversed, such as the western USA, during fairly long periods of time:

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/10/wet-cold-and-hot-dry-cycles/

    In those places you can count on a coldening to be reflected in MORE water and more wet, not less. Though yes, as you enter an Ice Age the END RESULT is a very much dryer and more sterile environment. As we’re “about due” for our present interglacial to end, and plunge us into a new Glacial Ice period, I must wonder why M. Gates desires us to push mightily in that direction…

    Also, as a cycle swaps FROM warming TO COLDER you get an increase in rain and snow as the oceans cool. (They lag the land by quite a while, so you get these inflection point artifacts). The air cools off dramatically, and THAT drives the heat engine to cool the oceans for a long time (and thus the added precipitation).

    M. Gates lives in a static world where all things happen immediately. One where temperatures do not need mass, lag times, and specific heat to indicate heat gain or loss. One where the oceans are immediatly warmed the moment a bit more sun happens and instantly cool when the sun naps. One of “models”…

    Odd things are happening with pressure gradient over the Arctic and it may be related to both the lower than average sea ice and the bottom line is that it may increase the chance of cold outbreaks to points south of the arctic in the future…as counter-intuitive as this seems.

    Unfortunately, the Sea Ice is right about the middle of the pack for the last decade or two. It’s also about the same as it was the last time a Hot PDO swapped to a Cold PDO (back when we had submarines surfacing at the N.Pole in open water, with photographs…). But yes, “odd things are happening” with the pressure gradient as tons of increadibly frozen cold air plunges down from altitude where it’s dumped it’s heat to space and races back toward the equator to pick up more from the oceans.

    Along the way, that fridged Polar Air Mass hits a load of Moist Warm Air that’s blowing in off the oceans. And the collision dumps a load of rain and snow. (Releasing the heat in that moisture in that warm moist air, letting it leave to space too…).

    Repeat this for about, oh, 25 years more, and you start to reach the end of this PDO phase (rather like during the “New Little Ice Age” scare of the ’70s that I lived through…) when the oceans will have lost that stored ‘excess heat’. Then the whole thing can flip to the cold phase for another 30 years and you can be singing from the Global Warming himnal again.

    Look, you have a MAJOR problem here. A bunch of us are now old enough we’ve lived through an entire PDO cycle, end to end. We’re starting to have “Groudhog day” moments mixed in with Deja Vu. We’ve been here before. We know what comes next. And it’s cold. Very cold.

    I REMEMBER the “loopy jet stream” from the days of my youth on TV (in Black and White then…). I REMEMBER the reports of bitter cold from Europe as the warm 1940’s turned into the fridgid 1950-60s. I REMEMBER running out to touch the bit of snow that fell in my home town in the central valley of California in the early 1960s (and how most folks had never seen that before). BUT I also remember going to talk to several of the Very Old Folks in town, some in their 80’s and more. And I remember them saying “Well, it snowed like this a long time ago when I was young, but then it got very very hot in the 1930s… this isn’t really anything new, just going back to what it was.”

    So I’m sorry, but you can’t erase those memories. You can’t erase the cold before the 1930s and you can’t erase the heat OF the 1930s and you can’t erase the cold of the ’60s and ’70s and now we’ve peaked in the 1990’s at about the same as the 1930s and I KNOW what comes next because this is where I came into this movie a long long time ago. And I remember things very very well…

    BTW, last year it snowed in the Central Valley of California again. First time in, oh, about 1 PDO cycle… We ought to have about 15 years of it if this cycle repeats instead of rhymes… or ought that to be rimes (as in ‘rime ice’ ;-)

    So if you want this “hydrological argument” of yours to work, you need to add the effects of variance by geography and time lags. Otherwise it’s just a load of yellow frozen hyrological argument… and I’m not eating any.

  81. Oh, and R.Gates:

    You’ll need to explain how extra heat input, with retained excess heat, to our heat engine is showing up as a colder “hot side” as well as a colder “cold side”…

  82. “Oh, and that unfortuante point about CO2 changing 800 years AFTER the temperature changes”

    I keep reading about this here, but I haven’t seen any links posted (note – I’ve only been reading here recently). I’ve found a few articles but was wondering if there were any that are better at explaining and documenting this than others?

  83. “MODELS are not PROOF of ANYTHING. They are human constructed FANTASIES. I’ve run a supercomputer doing modeling (including a few weeks of runs for a Stanford guy getting his Ph.D. doing cloud models). I can make a model give you any answer you like. That doesn’t mean it has any truth in it at all. Models are best used “to inform our ignorance”, not as any statement about what is or is not real. Learn that. It matters.”

    Isn’t the First Law of Computers:
    Garbage In – Garbage Out?

  84. R. Gates is the most effective troll I have encountered. Anthony offered us a really wonderful topic, the third great over-achieving arctic air mass in as many years, and R. Gates managed to turn the entire conversation to snowfall and his utterly fanciful “advanced hydrological cycle.” When you have that kind of gift for sales, you really should get into a sales job.

    REPLY: Yeah, I’m thinking of assigning him to the back room. He’s quite a waste of effort for everyone. – Anthony

  85. R. Gates, you are full of statements made by others that you repeat without thinking. In NE Oregon, El Nino means less winter precip, and especially the kind that stays around. We kinda dry out. La Nina brings us lots of moisture that stay around in the form of snow. So a blanket statement (one I have mistakenly made) does not actually mirror reality when things go cold or warm. The “wet” stuff shifts around, as does the “dry” stuff. Same is true for the “cold” stuff, and the “warm” stuff. When “wet” shifts North, we get snow pack up the ying yang with lots of irrigation water during the Summer. When “wet” shifts South, we get skunked and have to cut down on crop irrigation in the Summer.

    In other words, the hydrological cycle doesn’t increase or decrease globally, it just shifts around.

    For starters, because it appears you are in need of a tutorial, in learning about shifting weather pattern variations, go to the last page of the ENSO update to see why we get snowy wet when things go cold out in the Pacific.

    http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf

  86. Anthony, my Aunt has just sent a bunch of pictures from Russia (don’t know where she got them) of snow. And I don’t just mean “snow” like you and I understand. I mean S…N…O…W! Email me and I will forward them to you. Trust me, your eyes will bug out.

    [Note: Pamela, please post these requests to Tips & Notes, where Anthony is sure to see them. Sincerely, ~dbs, mod.]

  87. Pamela Gray says:
    December 13, 2010 at 5:42 pm
    In other words, the hydrological cycle doesn’t increase or decrease globally, it just shifts around.
    ====================================
    Si, but it was more fun watching Gates……..

  88. Tony says:
    December 13, 2010 at 5:13 pm
    I’ve found a few articles but was wondering if there were any that are better at explaining and documenting this than others?
    ===========================================
    Tony, google “CO2 800 year lag”
    JoNova has a good webpage on it too.

    “CO2 didn’t cause the temp rise in the first 800 years, but it’s responsible for all the rise after that”
    That’s the other explanation.
    Yeah right….

  89. Having just read the post and 100 comments I am left wondering what happens to the vacuum left in the Arctic region after all the freezing air has escaped to set all the record cold temps in the lower 48?

    I did read that someone thinks that the temperatures up there are other worldly warm. Now how did that happen?

  90. R Gates’s posts….remind me of an obnoxious neighbor on my street who walks his dog(s) all the time and lets the dogs poop wherever they want, never bothering to pick up after them.

    He comes in and drops a few bombs of posts, never owning up to the crap that they are, and then leaves everybody else having to clean up a bunch of unnecessary messes.

    Truly a waste of time.

    Back on topic to this thread….in the thick of this cold outbreak:

    Is it Nome Alaska? Nope….its North Carolina.

    Currently 0 Degrees (Fahrenheit) with 12″ of new snow on top of 24″ last week.

    Cool webcam shots:

    http://www.skibeech.com/quadcam1.html

    http://www.skibeech.com/cam.html

    And yes, Westerners, don’t laugh….those are snow guns.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  91. Anthony writes:

    “REPLY: Yeah, I’m thinking of assigning him to the back room. He’s quite a waste of effort for everyone. – Anthony”

    God Bless You, Sir, once again. You don’t even have to do it. God Bless You for the thought. And God Bless You, once again, for hosting the most delightful of all blogs.

  92. E.M.Smith says:
    December 13, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    Oh, and R.Gates:

    You’ll need to explain how extra heat input, with retained excess heat, to our heat engine is showing up as a colder “hot side” as well as a colder “cold side”…

    Explanations? Global warming don’t need no stinking explanations!

    ;O)

  93. I find it interesting that there have been three negative teleconnection signals lately, the AO, NAO, and the PNA (Pacific North American).

    On the CPC site the PNA has been consistently negative, and that usually means troughiness and cold for the Pac NW, but it has been rather mild there lately.

    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/pna.shtml

    Of course, that is about to change with a sharp cold front….WSW up for the Cascades and the Coast Ranges..

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  94. Alexander Feht says:
    December 13, 2010 at 12:54 pm

    Strange: the map shows a red dot (High Temp) in South Colorado, right where we are, but it has been very cold here in the end of November, and kind of normal in December, no unusual warmth to speak of. What’s up with that?

    It’s been so cold homeless folk probably have a fire in a barrel next to the temperature station.

  95. R Gates
    In the eastern half of Australia, cold means wet and hot means dry.
    And yes, I’m also old enought to have experienced the full cycle, like EM Smith.
    More than that, my family have been farming since 1855.
    There’s good family stories about fire and drought and flooding rain.
    What comes around, goes around.
    And the long term trend for rainfall at Sydney town is flat, ziltch, nil, nothing.
    And temperature at Observatory Hill was also flat until the Cahill Expressway opened in March 1958, taking the UHI right up to the thermometer.

    The earth is just not heating up – its the measurements that are soaked in the petrol of UHI that are the problem.

  96. R Gates
    At Sydney, the rainfall follows an uncertain 20 or 40 year peak to peak cycle.
    In between peaks it gradually falls in a declining zigzag.
    That’s been true since 1859 when continuous records commenced.
    We’ve had our very long drought.
    From mid year on, 2010 has introduced the start of a major peak period.
    That is likely to continue for a year or two.
    Then back to falling rainfall levels for another spin of the chaotic system.
    Rainfall in sydney – Hurst index number approximately 0.02.
    You understand that? – a very strong tendency to revert to the mean.

    You study chaotic systems?
    If so – why do you take any notice of long term IPCC forecasts?
    If not – why Not?

    As a former president should have once said “It’s the chaotic climate Stxxxx”

  97. When I first started getting interested in climatology back in the mid 1960’s I remember reading that periods of high snowfall create an albedo effect reflecting more sunlght back out into space. This sets off a period of glacier growth further reflecting sunlight. Based on this model planetary temperatures should start averaging downwards over the next few years.

    This based on reading papers in the Scientific American when it was an unbiased journal.

  98. Dear Anthony,

    I know how you feel about consigning R.Gates to the basement. However, since he prompted a slew of engaging and informative comments by E.M. Smith, perhaps we’d be better off to realize that he has his uses. ;-)

    Here in the Willamette Valley of western Oregon, we had some shirt-sleeve warmening today, thanks to a lot of Pacific air and moisture sloshing in from the southwest. Tomorrow, thank heavens, we’ll be back to coldening. Speaking of coldening, we had snow slosh in before Thanksgiving; to my memory the first that’s happened in the 40 years I’ve lived here.

  99. Sam Parsons says:
    December 13, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    On this particular run of colder winters, I took notice of what the Neutron Monitors show for the 70’s cooling and now.
    From 1971 to 1978, there is an extended mesa of GCR’s.
    Now, from 2006 to present we have an even higher mesa of heightend GCR’s.
    Except for the replacing of the ‘drought’ out West with overbearing precipitation, the East is getting pounded just like in the mid to late 70’s. David Archibald may not have the Neutron rates pegged, but he sure got the overall cooling right.
    And that is in spite of the offical line of broiler stories from GISS, MET and others.

  100. R. Gates comments might have some merit if facts would support his theory, but they do not. Accelerated hydrological cycle starts with the idea that warmer water leads to more evaporation . . . . However, water vapor is not uniformly distributed across the world. The origin of the water vapor in the December 2010 storms did not come from oceans where the anomoly was positive, rather where it is negative. Likewise, last year, the origin of the water vapor for those storms was again from ocean areas with negative anomolies. These snow storms are not happening because the oceans are warmer, but rather because land areas are cold.

    Regarding the LA Times article, we are a long ways from certainty in long term river flows, but we should also pay attention to the impact of pavement and land use development on river flow. One of the biggest problems with the CAGW movement is that the rush to blame global warming on problems that need attention from a non-climate solution. Often, we should address land-use practices instead of putting the blame on CO2. Many communities and nations try to escape responsibility by blaming the CO2 bogeyman.

  101. Mooloo says: (December 13, 2010 at 1:38 pm)

    The point is that we are meant to be in the grip of the “hottest year evah”. At such a time there will still be cold days. Even very cold days. But having a large range of places having record lows does not fit.

    Says who? This blog post highlights a large number of record cold temperatures occurring over about 1% of the Earth’s surface during about 2% of the solar year. But what’s happening everywhere else and every-when else?

    Sure, it’s really freaking cold right now in the Southeast U.S. Guess how many record lows were set in the continental U.S. yesterday (December 12)? Four. Guess how many record highs were set?

    73

  102. AusieDan says: December 13, 2010 at 7:23 pm

    At Sydney, the rainfall follows an uncertain 20 or 40 year peak to peak cycle. …
    From mid year on, 2010 has introduced the start of a major peak period.
    That is likely to continue for a year or two.
    Then back to falling rainfall levels for another spin of the chaotic system.

    This seems self-contradictory. If it is chaotic, then how would there be any “predictable” patterns?

    For those who like hard numbers, a quick analysis of annual rainfall in Syndey since 1859 show the following for auto-correlation:

    Autocorrelation Function: C14

    Lag ACF T LBQ
    1 0.093685 1.16 1.36
    2 -0.011724 -0.14 1.38
    3 0.145380 1.78 4.70
    4 -0.004412 -0.05 4.71
    5 -0.103306 -1.24 6.40
    6 0.015222 0.18 6.44
    7 -0.089141 -1.06 7.72
    8 -0.016603 -0.20 7.77
    9 0.020721 0.24 7.84
    10 -0.019414 -0.23 7.90
    11 0.006520 0.08 7.91
    12 -0.015990 -0.19 7.95
    13 0.165675 1.95 12.57
    14 0.056874 0.65 13.12
    15 -0.015498 -0.18 13.16
    16 -0.070246 -0.80 14.01
    17 0.005504 0.06 14.02
    18 -0.029021 -0.33 14.17
    19 -0.092428 -1.05 15.67
    20 -0.035600 -0.40 15.89
    21 0.065214 0.74 16.65
    22 -0.056459 -0.63 17.23
    23 0.100292 1.12 19.05
    24 -0.043924 -0.49 19.41
    25 0.008606 0.10 19.42
    26 0.096210 1.07 21.14
    27 0.018765 0.21 21.20
    28 -0.161562 -1.78 26.13
    29 0.154209 1.66 30.66
    30 -0.045344 -0.48 31.05
    31 -0.089909 -0.95 32.62
    32 0.016317 0.17 32.67
    33 -0.035275 -0.37 32.91
    34 -0.001373 -0.01 32.91
    35 0.016855 0.18 32.97
    36 0.009671 0.10 32.99
    37 -0.029959 -0.31 33.17
    38 0.079750 0.84 34.48
    39 0.044114 0.46 34.88
    40 0.116975 1.22 37.74
    41 -0.032963 -0.34 37.97
    42 -0.010617 -0.11 37.99
    43 -0.083303 -0.86 39.48
    44 -0.009838 -0.10 39.50
    45 -0.105685 -1.09 41.95

    What does that mean?
    * There are no statistically significant repeating patterns up thru 45 year cycles.
    * There are close-t0-significant correlations for the following:
    –> positive correlation between one year and the 3rd following year
    –> positive correlation between one year and the 13th following year
    –> negative correlation between one year and the 28th following years
    –> positive correlation between 1 year and the 29th following years

    There seems to be no autocorrelation anywhere near 20 or 40 years.
    There seems to be no correlation from one year to the next year, so I don’t see any strong tendency to revert to the mean.

    If you look at the monthly data, then there is a strong autocorrelation every year. This is of course, expected since there are definite wet seasons and dry seasons in pretty much every climate. In this sense there is a strong tendency to revert to the mean — if it is wet one month (ie the rainy season) then it will almost certainly be dry 6 months later (ie the dry season) .

    I will admit that I can’t find much good info on the “Hurst Index” in the internet. Could you explain what it means and how it is calculated? Were you quoting he hurst index for annual data or monthly data?

  103. To add my anecdotal weather facts to the fray, I live in Mpls. And here I am in Maine right now, hoping to do some skiing, but it’s in the mid-50s and raining. Where’s my record lows?!

  104. Wow, I go out for dinner and a bit more Christmas shopping and things get a little interesting. Well, I obviously can’t answer all these “reactions” to my posts, but I would like to give a further explanation of the hydrological cycle and carbon-rock cycle, as some of you seem a bit confused on this. To start out, let’s take a look at a perfect example of this confusion:

    latitude says (referring to the Hydrological Cycle):
    December 13, 2010 at 3:04 pm

    Gates, I’m not sure I can follow your train of thought on this one.

    If temperatures rising drives the HyC, and causes it to speed up.
    The HyC puts CO2 into the atmosphere.
    If the HyC is speeding up, then it’s putting more and more CO2 into the atmosphere.

    _______

    Let’s break this down into a bit more detail, just so everyone can follow. To remind everyone, the hydrological cycle is the cycle of water moving from oceans and seas (and also of course other bodies of water) into the atmosphere through evaporation and then precipitating out of clouds as snow, rain, hail, sleet, etc. The engine of the hydrological cycle is of course heat which has primarily (though not entirely, i.e. think of thermal energy) come to earth from our sun.

    The other big cycle that I’ve been referencing is the carbon-rock cycle on earth, and specfically the cycle of carbon dioxide moving from the atmosphere into the oceans which occurs as part of the hydrological cycle. Here’s how it works…when it rains, or snows the CO2 from the air interacts with water in the air to form a very weak form of carbonic acid. The formula is:

    CO2 + H2O -> H2CO3

    That weak carbonic acid weathers the rocks and interacts with precipitated water and the silcates of the rocks to form bicarbonates. The formula is:

    H2CO3 + H2O + silicate minerals -> HCO3- + cations (Ca++, Fe++, Na+, etc.) + clays

    These bicarbonates flow to the sea and are precipitated from the calcium in the sea water to eventually end of as limestone on the bottom of the ocean, through a chemical reaction similar to this:

    H2CO3 + H2O + silicate minerals -> HCO3- + cations (Ca++, Fe++, Na+, etc.) + clays

    In this way, contrary to latitudes confused post above, it is the hydrological cycle working in conjunction with the carbon cycle of rock weathering that REMOVES CO2 from the atmosphere and returns it to the ocean. This is very interesting cycle, and provides a natural negative feedback process to keep the CO2 levels within a range that doesn’t allow the earth to get too cold or too hot. What we see, and have seen for millions of years on earth is that when CO2 increases, the earth warms, and since heat is the engine of the hydrological cycle, the hydrological cycle acclerates to remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere. As the CO2 levels begin to come down (through the weathering process decribed above), the hydrological cycle slows down, less CO2 is removed, and so a natural feedback process is established.

    This hydrological cycle/carbon-rock weathering cycle is a fundamental cycle on the earth, and the only real problem with our current CO2 levels is that this cycle normally operates over hundreds of thousands to millions of years, not the few hundred years it’s taken to increase carbon dioxide levels by some 40% to levels not seen in 800,000 years.

    Finally, for those who are insisting that the current cold spell on the east coast proves the earth is in for a cold spell, one really ought to take a closer look at the facts. Cold air is being funneled directly from the Arctic, but as a whole, the Arctic is not colder than normal, nor is the N. Hemisphere. Certainly, nearly everyone here admits this is an anomalous situation (much like the Russian heat wave of last summer), but what we all seem to disagree about is the cause of the anomaly. At least one recent study predicted this, and and the cause had nothing to do with some new cold period othe earth was entering, but someting quite the opposite:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AF3C720101116

    But even last summer we had suggestions of this:

    http://www.physorg.com/news195485722.html

    So, even though the arctic right now is not seeing record cold temps and Arctic sea ice remains below the 30 year average, the AGW skeptics would like to believe that we are heading back into some very cold period, even though, 2010 remains as one of the warmest years on instrument record (perhaps not the warmest, but close). If the entire N. Hemisphere were seeing anomalously cold temps I might even pay attention to these fears, but the latest full monthly and 3-month data simply does not support fears of an impending global cooling:

    http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/maproom/.Global/.Atm_Temp/Anomaly.html

    The simple truth seems to be that atmospheric pressure anomalies have opened up the arctic freezer door and unforunately, the eastern U.S. is currently right in the line of fire…

  105. To those on the west side of the Cascades, Portland, Oregon in particular-
    when we get our cold Canada high pressure at or about Jan 1,-10. The east
    winds are going to be something to behold this year. Just sayin’…

  106. One slight correction to the previous post (and a dumb mistake at that!). The reaction for the precipitation of calcium carbonate in sea water to form limestone should look more like this:

    Ca++ + 2HCO3- -> CaCO3 + CO2 + H2O

    Sorry for any confusion…

  107. Tony says: (December 13, 2010 at 5:13 pm)

    “Oh, and that unfortuante point about CO2 changing 800 years AFTER the temperature changes”

    I keep reading about this here, but I haven’t seen any links posted (note – I’ve only been reading here recently). I’ve found a few articles but was wondering if there were any that are better at explaining and documenting this than others?

    Hi Tony, you would do well to read this explanation at the “Pro-AGW” site, Skeptical Science.

    It is true that during previous interglacials (the warm periods between ice ages), CO2 increases lagged about 1000 years behind temperature increases. It is not true, however, that this is in any way unexpected or “unfortunate.”

    The climate changes in response to external “forcings.” Without some sort of forcing, the climate would remain in equilibrium and would not change. When a forcing is applied, the climate is no longer in equilibrium, which causes it to change until a new equilibrium is reached.

    In addition to primary forcings, there are also many different “feedbacks” — some positive, some negative — that magnify or diminish the effects of the forcing. Keep in mind that feedbacks do not cause changes to “spiral out of control” as is commonly misunderstood. Feedbacks simply modify where the final equilibrium will be. (They can also affect how long it takes to reach equilibrium.)

    There are very many different kinds of forcings, including changes in solar output, volcanic explosions, plate tectonics, and variations in the Earth’s orbit. This last one is widely accepted as the cause of the intermittent ice ages over at least the past several hundred thousand years. There are also very many different feedbacks, and the total size of the sum of all feedbacks really is the main argument in the global warming debate today (in my view).

    So, here is one important forcing: In the past two centuries or so, humans have converted about ½ trillion tons of carbon from a solid form into a gaseous form. (CO2 – the gaseous form of carbon – is a greenhouse gas.) This has never happened before at such a magnitude or rapidity.

    According to the article I referred you to, CO2 is outgassed from warming oceans. This is a positive feedback and so amplifies the initial warming — that is, it causes the equilibrium temperature to be higher than it otherwise would. In past interglacials, the forcing caused by changes in the Earth’s orbit is not large enough to explain the temperature changes observed, but the same forcing along with the CO2 and other feedback effects is.

    Given the above information, would you expect CO2 to lead or lag temperature changes in past interglacials? In fact, if CO2 led temperature changes in the past, that would be very difficult to explain! What would cause CO2 to be released in such large quantities?

    Today, though, the situation is reversed. CO2 concentration is rising and the cause is not changes in the Earth’s orbit or outgassing from oceans. It’s us.

    After all, that is what the “A” in “AGW” is all about!

  108. R Gates Says:
    ” CO2=more heat=greater evaporation=great rainfall & snowfall in winter=greater weathering of rock to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.”

    Perhaps I missed something in my 6 years of Geology, but how does weathering of rock, take CO2 out of the atmosphere??? Most weathering is physical in nature (especially in winter) but chemical weathering is primarily oxidation.

  109. I look at it differently. The CO2 concentration is rising still. The temperature is not. That ought to end AGW.

    Consult Richard Feynman’s “The Key to Science” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b240PGCMwV0

    See Trenberth: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.

  110. R Gates’s posts….remind me of an obnoxious neighbor on my street who walks his dog(s) all the time and lets the dogs poop wherever they want, never bothering to pick up after them.

    He comes in and drops a few bombs of posts, never owning up to the crap that they are, and then leaves everybody else having to clean up a bunch of unnecessary messes.

    Truly a waste of time.

    Back on TOPIC OF THIS THREAD:

    Coldest top 5 Decembers in the past 50 years in the east?

    http://www.accuweather.com/video/90462062001/bastardi-december-eastern-cold-top-5-in-past-50-years-close.asp?channel=can

    Surely it is because of AGW.

    Of course when the flip to the milder winter occurs at the end of this year for the eastern US, that will be AGW as well.

    Hell…its ALL AGW.

    The more he and his the ilk open their traps….the more shrill they become.

    Keep “talking” R, keep talking.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  111. Although there are a lot more cold records than warm records on that map the warm part seems to be a part of the USA with less population so perhaps less measuring points?

    If that is the case I don’t think the split between number of records for hot or cold tells you much.

    Andy

  112. John F. Hultquist says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:44 pm
    I look at it differently. The CO2 concentration is rising still. The temperature is not. That ought to end AGW.

    _______
    ???? 2010 will be one of the warmest years on instrument record and the last decade was the warmest decade on instrument record. How is it that temps are not still rising? You truly have been drinking from the skeptics cool-aid a bit too long…

  113. R Gates claims that…

    “???? 2010 will be one of the warmest years on instrument record and the last decade was the warmest decade on instrument record. How is it that temps are not still rising? You truly have been drinking from the skeptics cool-aid a bit too long…”

    You know very well that global temperatures are more or less flat lining, you can spin the figures and cherry pick certain years. We do not know how 2010 will pan out because nov/dec figures are not yet out.
    Large parts of the north and south were cooler in 2010, the southern hemisphere was much cooler with many records for cold and snow with south America suffering a bitter winter and Australia/New Zealand cooler than for some time.
    The last decade was the warmest on the instrumental record? You fail to mention that satellite records only go back 30yrs and the ground sensor record is so riddled with errors, uncertainties and poor coverage not to mention ‘adjustments’ downward for earlier decades and upwards for later decades.
    Over the last ten years can you state how much the temperature has increased using satellite data and the margin of error? No of course you will not answer because it shows a very uncomfortable reality and one which you choose to ignore. Cherry picking and selective highlighting of manipulated data?

    OK, using the satellite record.

    How much have global temperatures risen in the last ten years?
    How much have global temperatures risen in the last five years?

    Add the margin of error and is the rate increasing or declining?

  114. R….as always you are completely full of it.

    Ummmm. Duh. There has not been any statistically significant “global warming” in 15 years.

    Meanwhile, freeze warnings are hoisted…(crazy for early to mid December) all the way to Miami.

    Even when this hard cold start to an eastern USA winter evaporates…there is no denying the ENSO-influenced global drop in temperature.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

    And before you get on the “warmest decade on record” bulls**t….can you please provide records back during the previous 4.5 Billion 99.9999 million years??

    Right. I figured that. You can not.

    You don’t know what the warmest “decade” (god how I hate these false construct goalposts) is anymore than NASA GIZZ does.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  115. I’m definitely a skeptic of AGW, but I do enjoy reading Judith Curry’s site and posts on WUWT by people like R Gates – I learn a lot. And I want to say thanks to Gates – he takes a hiding, comes back for more, and offers his views in a polite and reasonable manner. If there were no counter-arguments, this would be a far duller place to visit.

    A pity he’s wrong… :)

  116. What we are seeing is nearly déjà vu of year 2000, with less tropical systems formed in the eastern Pacific. At this same point in 2000 we were also coming out of solar minimum, there was a La Nina, and the ‘ramp up’ side volcanic activity.

    But in all the volcanic activity during ramp down of solar cycle 22, the pause as it bottomed out, and the ramp up of cycle 23 there was only one VEI-4 eruption. We now may well have had 7 VEI-4 since May, ’08, if Redoubt hadn’t been lowered to 3 and Merapi & Eyjafjallajökull come in as 4’s as expected.

    The weather is a bit more perturbed now than it was then, Gates, can you at least give me that?

  117. Thanks for the memories E.M.Smith,
    I can match them in disparate parts of the world, near 40 years in central England, long hot summers in the late 30,s sleeping in the garden in hammocks between the apple trees to escape the oppressive heat indoors, and using grandfathers key- on ice skates to skate on frozen floods that persisted for weeks in the late 40’s, ones he used in the 1880’s on the canal and floods then. Then in the central tablelands, NSW Australia for nearly another 40 yrs, cold wet 70’s that finished a tourist business for me, then heat and drought in the 80’s then pretty average rainfall and temperature since then.
    Even the dramatic floods that closed the Sydney to Melbourne highway in 1956 for two weeks have been repeated now, but the bridges are better !

    Perhaps we are in for a couple of decades of cooler weather, our rainfall this year exceeded the 30 yr record by the end of November and December has exceeded its average so far. Cool-ing does seem to push up the precipitation.

  118. For the past 10 days, we have recieved 1/2 of our winter snow load in my area at 3 feet.
    Snow early is a problem as the solar radiation that was being absorbed by the ground is now being reflected. The next problem WILL be an exceptionally longer winter due to the extra snow to melt. Again more reflected solar radiation.

    Think next summer will be colder than normal?
    I do!

  119. It just doesn’t stop does it?

    Here is the latest from Nature Climate

    Industry: Hard hits to ski resorts

    If recent trends are any indication, climate change in the coming decades will hit the Austrian ski industry hard, with artificial snowmaking unable to keep pace with an anticipated decline in natural snowfall

  120. So Mr R Gates, the London ice fairs of the 16th and 17th century due to ‘acceleration in the hydrological cycle’?

    Much colder then, lots more snow than now, so I guess by your reasoning they must have had even more dramatic global warming than we have to today…… yeah right.

    Skeptic is to open minded as AGW believer is to ……………………..

  121. The other big cycle that I’ve been referencing is the carbon-rock cycle on earth, and specfically the cycle of carbon dioxide moving from the atmosphere into the oceans which occurs as part of the hydrological cycle. Here’s how it works…when it rains, or snows the CO2 from the air interacts with water in the air to form a very weak form of carbonic acid. The formula is:

    CO2 + H2O -> H2CO3

    That weak carbonic acid weathers the rocks and interacts with precipitated water and the silcates of the rocks to form bicarbonates. The formula is:

    H2CO3 + H2O + silicate minerals -> HCO3- + cations (Ca++, Fe++, Na+, etc.) + clays

    These bicarbonates flow to the sea and are precipitated from the calcium in the sea water to eventually end of as limestone on the bottom of the ocean, through a chemical reaction similar to this:
    =====================================================
    Gates, if it really worked that way, carbon would be limited in the oceans.
    The carbonates are the buffer.
    People can’t claim “ocean acidification” and then claim that the oceans are
    saturated in bicarbonates at the same time.

    Either you don’t have saturation and you have “ocean acidification”,
    or you have saturation and the oceans are sequestering carbon.

    For what you are saying, the oceans would have to be saturated in bicarbonates.

  122. Anthony Watts says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:35 am

    “Since “eadler” usually doesn’t notice or chooses not to notice corrections, I’m point it out that I’ve made a significant correction to his false comment above. He claims GISS has November Land Ocean Index at .96 which is totally bogus.”

    I have indeed noticed the correction. The figure of 0.96C is not really bogus. It is a correct figure for a different index. It is the Meteorological Stations index that has a record high of 0.96C for November.
    As you pointed out the value for the Nov 2010 Land Ocean Index is .74C which is also a record high for Nov.

    REPLY: Sorry Eric, I had to get your attention, since you are so strong headed you usually don’t address your errors pointed out, you just keep posting. So the brakes were applied for you to get you to stop and notice. Your subsequent comments (which went to the bit bucket) skirted around the issue of your error. Even this one refuses to address it fully. You cited GISS land-ocean index as being .96, I said that’s “bogus, and it doesn’t appear in the record at all”, which is true. Now you are trying to argue that you were correct all along saying ” The figure of 0.96C is not really bogus.”. But if I had made the same error, you and half a dozen people would be all over me. I suppose this is as much as your ego will allow, so carry on.

    – Anthony Watts

  123. I grew up in the midwest where -30F winters and head-high snowdrifts were not uncommon. But I’m sitting here just north of West Palm Beach Florida where we normally only have a few chilly days in the last week of January and its 30degrees below normal for the second time in two weeks with nightly lows going into the 20s. The crops are freezing and farmers are turning them under. And it looks like we’ll have at least another month of cold spells.

    Yeah Gore-ists, keep telling yourself that ‘local weather isn’t climate’…

  124. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 9:42 am
    The acceleration of the hydrological cycle is the way the earth has provided a negative feedback to control the levels of CO2 for millions of years. CO2=more heat=greater evaporation=great rainfall & snowfall in winter=greater weathering of rock to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
    The only issue now is that normally CO2 hasn’t increased by 40% in just a few hundred years, so exactly how this will affect the natural negative feedback mechanism of rock weathering isn’t known.

    ROFLMAO. Keep it up Gates.

  125. Right in the middle of Texas are a daily high and daily low record almost directly atop each other. What’re the odds?

    Just sayin…

  126. Howard, your argument amounts to “This time it’s different”

    When I look at the ice core charts, I see cyclic warming and cooling trends. These repeat on what appears to be a fairly regular basis. Right now, we are in the middle of one of those warm spikes that show up in between the larger glacial periods. The spike we are on right now isn’t nearly as warm as previous spikes, and all the previous spikes were ended by a precipitous DROP in global temperatures.

    This has happened before, more than once. I’m pretty sure it’s going to happen again. I have a LOT of confidence in the power of nature regarding such matters.

    Frankly, given what I see, I HOPE AGW is true and that we CAN affect the climate in that manner, because if we can’t, we’re in for some SERIOUS cold weather in the future that’s going to make this winter look like an Indian Summer.

  127. Tony says:
    December 14, 2010 at 9:50 am

    “Howard, your argument amounts to “This time it’s different”

    When I look at the ice core charts, I see cyclic warming and cooling trends. These repeat on what appears to be a fairly regular basis. Right now, we are in the middle of one of those warm spikes that show up in between the larger glacial periods. The spike we are on right now isn’t nearly as warm as previous spikes, and all the previous spikes were ended by a precipitous DROP in global temperatures.”

    Tony, you are ignoring the evidence that Howard pointed to, which explains the origins of the ice age cycles, and why this time is different. Human activity has produced CO2 levels higher than any in the past 400,000 years.

    Your refusal to acknowledge the evidence discussed by Howard is disappointing.

    This has happened before, more than once. I’m pretty sure it’s going to happen again. I have a LOT of confidence in the power of nature regarding such matters.

    Frankly, given what I see, I HOPE AGW is true and that we CAN affect the climate in that manner, because if we can’t, we’re in for some SERIOUS cold weather in the future that’s going to make this winter look like an Indian Summer.”

  128. To clarify one item for R. Gates, not everybody who disagrees with him believes that we are heading toward significant cooling. Why could the earth not warm back up to the MWP? Or why could we not return to the Roman Optimum?
    Yes, I recognize that the Maunder Minimum / a period of few sun spots was associated with growth of global ice, and that the sun is currently going through a low sun spot activity. However, there could have been other features with the sun back then of which we had no concept, much less be able to measure. Maybe those features are present today, and maybe they are not. (And how about other possible explanations of the LIA such as a coincidental orbital disturbance?) It is premature to conclude that we are returning to a period of significant cooling.
    While I believe some skeptics pay excessive attention to sunspots in forecasting cooling, there are also potential pitfalls for the other side. I believe that the scientific community will be ultimately embarrassed by the IPCC claim this decade that solar variations had less than a .1 degree impact on temperatures in the past 250 years. Perhaps the models conclude that given the TSI input, but it probably is a stretch of confidence to believe that we have all the right solar measures – much less their values – in the models.

  129. R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 10:02 am

    There is, in essence, a huge “freezer door” opened right from the Arctic to the E. United States. Normally the Arctic will have several closed low pressure systems that hold most of the cold up there with only an occasional outbreak and that outbreak will only usually affect the Northern U.S. The large strong high pressure system over Cananda combined with the low pressure over the eastern U.S. is that “opened freezer door” sucking that air right from the Arctic. Now, on the flip side, the temperatures in the Arctic are at normal to above normal across the whole of the Arctic, just as you’d expect to happen if you left your own freezer door open– it would be above average inside the freezer!

    Arctic temperatures are fluctuating around normal, not higher. Your “to above normal” is your trademark mix of sleight-of-hand and self-deception. “Arctic temps are normal. Or above normal? Yes – they’re above normal!” Quantum logic?

    The Freezer door is open but the freezer aint getting any colder just now.

    R. Gates says:
    December 13, 2010 at 8:51 pm

    What we see, and have seen for millions of years on earth is that when CO2 increases, the earth warms, and since heat is the engine of the hydrological cycle, the hydrological cycle acclerates to remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere.

    Over the last half billion years or so what we see is this:

    Between levels of 300 and 8000 ppm, CO2 has no correlation with global temperature, this argument “when CO2 increases, the earth warms” has no factual basis. The above data argues strongly against any forcing role of CO2 in temperature. The effect of CO2 on climate is mostly indirect, via its effect on plants and trees. (Its biology, not physics.)

  130. Tony says: (December 14, 2010 at 9:50 am)

    Howard, your argument amounts to “This time it’s different”

    Yes, that’s kind of the whole point of AGW.

    When I look at the ice core charts, I see cyclic warming and cooling trends. These repeat on what appears to be a fairly regular basis. Right now, we are in the middle of one of those warm spikes that show up in between the larger glacial periods.

    Indeed, the current interglacial is about 10–15,000 years old, which is about how long they typically last (at least recently). Milankovich cycles, though, are really several cycles overlain on each other, sometimes in phase with each other and sometimes out of phase. Because of how the phases line up, some interglacials last quite a bit longer than others, and the current 100,000-year cycle has not always been dominant. Recent studies indicate that the current interglacial could last 30–50,000 more years (absent anthropogenic effects). And the glacial-interglacial transitions themselves take thousands of years.

    The climate forcing from our rapid release of greenhouse gases dwarfs anything we could expect based on natural cycles. For more info, read Chapter 6.4 of the Working Group I Report from the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report.

  131. Eadler – I read it. The argument is basically that “this time it’s different because we’re doing it” and isn’t all that different from “I know God exists because the Bible says so”.

    A question: How many failed predictions must a theory produce before it’s considered a failed theory? And why is that number so different for “climate science” than for other sciences?

  132. latitude says: December 14, 2010 at 6:01 am

    [R. Gates quote]
    =====================================================
    Gates, if it really worked that way, carbon would be limited in the oceans.
    The carbonates are the buffer.
    People can’t claim “ocean acidification” and then claim that the oceans are
    saturated in bicarbonates at the same time.

    Either you don’t have saturation and you have “ocean acidification”,
    or you have saturation and the oceans are sequestering carbon.

    For what you are saying, the oceans would have to be saturated in bicarbonates.

    Exactly. In addition, there are many high-plains/semi-arid/desert areas where the carbonates collect on the native rock. The rain fall is so minimal, that carbon stays pretty much right there.

  133. Tony says: (December 14, 2010 at 11:40 am)

    The argument is basically that “this time it’s different because we’re doing it” and isn’t all that different from “I know God exists because the Bible says so”.

    I don’t follow this at all. Maybe you could explain it to me?

  134. Anonymous Howard says on December 14, 2010 at 3:44 pm

    Tony says: (December 14, 2010 at 11:40 am)

    The argument is basically that “this time it’s different because we’re doing it” and isn’t all that different from “I know God exists because the Bible says so”.

    I don’t follow this at all. Maybe you could explain it to me?

    What he actually means is that the argument that “this time it’s different because there has never been such a quick increase in CO2 before,” leaving aside whether we have sufficient resolution in our proxies to actually determine this is essentially a statement of:

    I can’t think of any other reason why the current warming is occurring, or I don’t want to develop and test any other hypotheses.

    Which is basically the same as:

    I can’t think of any way that evolution could be true, or I don’t want to think about any way that it could be a falsifiable hypothesis.

    That is to say, AGWers are in the same camp as creationists.

    Tell us about how the AGW claims could be falsified?

  135. Steve Keohane says:
    December 14, 2010 at 11:40 am
    latitude says: December 14, 2010 at 6:01 am

    [R. Gates quote]
    =====================================================
    Gates, if it really worked that way, carbon would be limited in the oceans.
    The carbonates are the buffer.
    People can’t claim “ocean acidification” and then claim that the oceans are
    saturated in bicarbonates at the same time.

    Either you don’t have saturation and you have “ocean acidification”,
    or you have saturation and the oceans are sequestering carbon.

    For what you are saying, the oceans would have to be saturated in bicarbonates.

    Exactly. In addition, there are many high-plains/semi-arid/desert areas where the carbonates collect on the native rock. The rain fall is so minimal, that carbon stays pretty much right there.

    ______
    I think you failed to catch a key part of the sequence. The calcium carbonate is easily precipitated from the calcium and bicarbonate ions in seawater by marine sea life such as coral. The equation would look something like this:

    Ca++ + 2HCO3- -> CaCO3 + CO2 + H2O

    The carbon cycle is hardly controversial and is pretty well understood as is it’s interaction with the hydrological cycle which is a key component. The only real link to be found was whether or not increased CO2 in the atmosphere would (as the models show and the theory behind them) act as a catalyst to acclerate the cycle. There is more and more research showing this is exactly the case:

    http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/09/28/1003292107.full.pdf+html

  136. Not one of the “above normal” temps that R. Gates and others attribute to the Arctic or elsewhere can be trusted. The reporting stations used have been (selectively) gutted. Once more I challenge anyone to look at this graph and its INSTANT nearly 2°C average jump when the stations were slashed in 1990 and believe that the current numbers are real:

  137. An Inq;
    “…it probably is a stretch of confidence to believe that we have all the right solar measures – much less their values – in the models.”

    Actually, it’s a sucker’s bet. It would be surprising if there were even one unfudged solar measure or value in the GCMs.

  138. Never forget that, by remit and design, the GCMs produce projections – “illustrations” – of “scenarios” selected for the purpose of properly educating and persuading politicians and the public that AGW is serious and deserves and warrants full-bore Panic Precautionary Principle Prevention. I.e., “Give us your money! All of it! You obviously can’t be trusted to use it properly without our expert guidance and control!”

  139. Anonymous Howard says:
    December 14, 2010 at 11:38 am

    Recent studies indicate that the current interglacial could last 30–50,000 more years (absent anthropogenic effects). And the glacial-interglacial transitions themselves take thousands of years.

    Do you have a link for these studies?

  140. R. Gates says:
    December 14, 2010 at 4:18 pm
    I think you failed to catch a key part of the sequence. The calcium carbonate is easily precipitated from the calcium and bicarbonate ions in seawater by marine sea life such as coral. The equation would look something like this:

    Ca++ + 2HCO3- -> CaCO3 + CO2 + H2O
    ====================================
    Sorry Gates, you’re dead wrong about that one.
    Your formula is correct, it just don’t work that way in real life.

    First, if there really is ocean acidification, the whole problem is about corals, dinoflagelates, etc NOT being able to lay down proper shells/exo/endo skeletons etc.

    If you have ocean acidification, you do not have carbonate saturation.
    Period, end of story.

    And for your water cycle to work, the entire water column of the ocean would have to have carbonate saturation. If at any point, there was less than saturation, your formula would break down.
    But then that’s the way the system works. Many things in the ocean are limiting, carbon being one of them. If things, like carbon, did not break down, were sequestered, and not shared and cycled, the ocean would not be able to support the types of life that it does.

  141. Record low maxima, in the absence of snow cover, are a very hard feat to accomplish:

    In keeping with the theme of this post….here’s another one. Also Salisbury MD and Richmond VA weighing in on record low maxima:

    Statement as of 7:15 PM EST on December 14, 2010

    … Record low maximum temperature set at Norfolk VA…

    A record low maximum temperature of 28 degrees was set at Norfolk VA
    today. This breaks the old record of 29 degree set in 1904.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  142. To those who appreciated my response, “Thanks!”. It’s nice to know it was worth it.

    I do note that R.Gates has had high school chemistry. It would be nice if he understood that the ocean is full of living species that control the carbonate. Things like corals, bivlaves, etc. The Diatoms, especially, fix about 40% of all the carbon fixed, and they are silicate limited (and it’s the grasses that give them the silicates). Then there are the fishes that excrete “gut rocks” made of carbonates. Yet he wants all that to go away and just be a saturated solution in a beaker. Sorry Charlie, only the Best Ideas get to be kissed… (the others get kissed-off…)

    Some on the role of slicate and diatoms in controlling the carbon fixation (and how that might impact C12 / C13 ratios to boot, as diatoms have a shift in their rate of relative ustilization with CONCENTRATION of CO2, so simply having more CO2 at all changes the C12 / C13 ratio fixed by the major fixer …):

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/silicon-in-life/

    So did R. Gates have a clue that C fixation was strongly driven by silica concentration? Nope, not a clue…

    I also note that Anonymous Howard is peddling time traveling CO2 again. Yeah, that’s the ticket. It just happens to follow 800 years behind because, well, because, well, it all works out prettier that way ;-)

    @Julian Braggins:

    Glad to be of help ;-) I grew up in a farm town. Between about 7 and 12 years old, we had a family restaurant in town. I spent many long days there (washing dishes some times, talking to customers others. Yeah, a kid 8 years old working for a living. I wanted the new bike and my parents said “There’s the sink”… $56 later at 25 cents an hour it was mine…)

    But the “old folks” in town hung out there too. I picked up several lifetimes of stories and insight from folks between about 60 and 90 years old who liked ‘talking to the kid’. Some of them had come to the town in the 1800’s… You know, horses, wagons… They had “perspective”. The “cups and saucers” sink was just behind the counter, so for many hours I was “face to face” with a customer while washing (by hand… no machines then…) and folks liked to talk. Probably the best orientation to life possible.

    In farm towns, folks talk about the weather alot. It’s where I learned to look at the sky and know what the day would be like. Every so often my family asks me ‘what to wear’. I go to the door, look into the wind, and tell them. (Just don’t ask for a long range prediction during spring or fall ;-) Not a lot of fancy names for the processes, but a lot of wisdom in the descriptions.

    @lattitude:

    Also note the METALIC manganese nodules by the megaton on the ocean floor. Going to be a bit hard to acidify anything with all that metal just waiting to react…

    The planet is mostly iron. In the long run, acids get consumed. Period. Full stop.

    An Inquirer says: To clarify one item for R. Gates, not everybody who disagrees with him believes that we are heading toward significant cooling. Why could the earth not warm back up to the MWP?

    Well, it COULD… but…

    I’m in the ‘leaning toward colder due to some evidence but not fully commited’ camp. Looking at the “wiggles” of the curves, we’re ‘due’ for a drop. Looking at the ‘fit a curve to the proxy peaks’ we’ve rolled over to a longer term drift down, and the present peak just, well, peaked. Looking at the solar state ( IFF “The Sun Did It” folks are right), says were headed for cold. Looking at the PDO… but you get the picture.

    It’s rather like the parabolic rise of a stock, or more recently gold. Unstable systems often have an overshoot / return to trend. Just watch a dog walk… So I’d bet money (and I do…) on colder. But I’d rather it was getting warmer… the cold path IS NOT the best one.

    Warm is GOOD.
    Cold is BAD.

    But I fear where headed for cold, based on the evidence:

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/14/quelccaya-peru/

    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/14/new-little-ice-age-2014/

    The problem is that there are many ‘wiggles’ of different periods and trying to make sure you’ve accounted for all of them can be a challenge. On the 100’s of years time scale, we’re headed for cold. On the thousands, way cold. On the 10’s… probably cold due to the PDO. But could next year or two be a warm excursion. Yup. And could we have one more “hurrah” of a solar cycle before the drop of longer term? Yup. And trying to get folks to think in terms longer than 10 years is nearly impossible.

    It is premature to conclude that we are returning to a period of significant cooling.

    Well, the answer actually depends ENTIRELY on how long a time period you use. Like all things fractal, the size changes with the size of ruler you use. On a 100,000 year time scale, we’re definitely headed for cold. Glacial cold. On an hourly time scale, it depends on which part of the planet you sit upon. 1000 years scale? Cold. 10 years scale? um… can’t say for sure, but probably colder. (PDO argues for that). One year time scale? Well, the sun could burp and make it 2 C hotter everywhere…

    So take a look at the links. Then place your bets. BUT make sure you know what time scale your are betting on.

    Unfortunately, it’s not enough evidence for a “scientific” proof. But it is enough to bet your Vegas money on it.

    @Tony:

    I think Anonymous Howard has no clue that “This time it’s different” is THE sure fire line for knowing someone is about to lose everything in a stock deal. IT IS NEVER DIFFERENT. Stocks, too, have quasi-periodic and chaotic nature within what looks like trends and patterns. You can even use some of them to make money. AND every time is absolutely unique. But it is NEVER EVER DIFFERENT. You just think it is as your experiential data sample is way to small to see that it’s just a rhyme…

    BTW, A.H., the wiki link on Milankovich is a dead giveaway. ANY article climate related on Wiki has been throughly buggered and corrupted. It’s useless. I’ve watched valid articles re-written to be AGW PC as soon as they were linked. So you’ll need to find some other “evidence” that we’re not already sliding down the cold side. If you look at the temperature history chart (that in the “Peru” link above, and yes, I picked it up from Wiki, but I’ve saved a copy, so WHEN it gets re-jiggered I’ll be able to do an A/B and show how it was changed ;-) you will see that we’re drifting lower, and have been for 7,000 years. We’re ALREADY drifting into the next Glacial. It’s just that it’s so slow folks don’t notice AND it has ripples (about 600 years long) that can go against that grain. But it doesn’t change the long term trend. Down. Period.

    So you can try to spin that notion of another 30,000 years of ‘good times’, but it just isn’t what’s happening. We are slowly and inexorably cooling. In a couple of thousand years you’ll notice…

    Oh, and using the IPCC as a reference? Really? A corrupted (Climategate anyone?) POLITICAL body? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, to discover that there is gambling going on are people using the IPCC as a reference!

  143. Anyone that is following the Unisys global SST record will acknowledge that the current oceanic conditions are trending to the very cool. But there are several warm patches as a result of the recent El Nino that will continue to drive evaporation rates. The La Nina will also allow more solar input via reduced cloud cover over the tropics, but the big factor is the cold air flowing from the poles that backs up the process creating a massive northern winter. ie left over heat converted to heavy snow and low temps.

    There will always be left over heat but it will be converted in times like these. When solar output is low the negative feed backs are far more effective.

    The cold air is a function of reduced solar output that controls the negative atmospheric teleconnections that we have seen during other cold spells. Its not about solar TSI, but more about how low solar magnetic/EUV output affects our atmospheric oscillations.

    The ENSO pattern along with the neg PDO will continue to drive our climate, but the trend will be downward for the next 2 decades.

  144. E.M.Smith says:
    December 14, 2010 at 8:48 pm
    To those who appreciated my response, “Thanks!”. It’s nice to know it was worth it.
    I do note that R.Gates has had high school chemistry. It would be nice if he understood that the ocean is full of living species that control the carbonate.
    =====================================================
    A little history on that formula.
    It is right out of Chemical Oceanography, Frank Millero.
    Frank and his book were the laughing stock, for exactly the same reasons.
    The first question you ask is: “Where are all those clean surfaces so these
    purely chemical reactions can take place?”
    Unfortunately, his book is still being taught.

  145. Richard Sharpe says: (December 14, 2010 at 3:59 pm)

    What he actually means is that the argument that “this time it’s different because there has never been such a quick increase in CO2 before,” leaving aside whether we have sufficient resolution in our proxies to actually determine this is essentially a statement of: I can’t think of any other reason why the current warming is occurring, or I don’t want to develop and test any other hypotheses.

    Richard, thanks for taking the time to elaborate on Tony’s response, but again, I disagree that the two statements are equivalent.

    There are plenty of reasons that climate changes — I listed several of them above: orbital cycles, plate tectonics, volcanic activity, solar activity; another important one I didn’t list that will surely interest you is evolution, such as the arrival of photosynthetic organisms, which led to the Huronian glaciation (warning: socialist Wikipedia link!).

    The environment has been in constant flux since the Earth formed and it continues to change and will continue to change. None of this is surprising or “unfortunate” to climatologists, and none of it invalidates the theory of AGW. The reasons or mechanisms behind climate change are myriad and their relative importance will also change over time.

    For example, Tony pointed to the recent cycles of glaciation which seem to be caused by Milankovitch cycles in the Earth’s orbit. Does that mean he (or you) believe that these cycles are the ONLY causes of climate change? Did you refuse to consider solar variation or volcanic explosions as causes of glaciation or the current warming? Of course not. Teasing out the primary causes of individual events may be difficult, but that doesn’t mean it is impossible. And just because you settle on one cause as the most likely answer doesn’t mean you couldn’t think of anything else or didn’t test any other hypotheses.

    Don’t forget that what prompted my exchange with Tony was his recognition of the fact that CO2 lags temperature in recent interglacials. Setting aside, as you have, whether there is sufficient resolution in the proxies to determine this, how could it possibly be unexpected? What scientists have speculated that sudden, unprovoked releases of CO2 caused these interglacials?

    I mentioned that our massive transfer of carbon from the ground into the atmosphere is unprecedented. You disagree. Are you saying this has happened before? If so, when? Or are you saying it’s not happening now?

    On a personal note, I find it odd that a defender of the theory of evolution would have a problem with the idea that things are different now than they were in the past. :)

  146. E.M. Smith said:

    E.M.Smith says:
    December 14, 2010 at 8:48 pm
    To those who appreciated my response, “Thanks!”. It’s nice to know it was worth it.

    I do note that R.Gates has had high school chemistry. It would be nice if he understood that the ocean is full of living species that control the carbonate.

    _____

    Do you think I didn’t understand that? Do you read my post PRIOR to the comment you made above where I said:

    “The calcium carbonate is easily precipitated from the calcium and bicarbonate ions in seawater by marine sea life such as coral.”

    The fact that marine life plays an important role in the carbon cycle was not missed by me and is interesting and fairly elementary, but it really wasn’t the key point in the discussion.

  147. Anonymous Howard–

    Your clear, logical, broad, and well-informed perspective continues to gain my respect…

  148. Geoff Sharp says: (December 14, 2010 at 6:51 pm)

    Anonymous Howard says:

    Recent studies indicate that the current interglacial could last 30–50,000 more years (absent anthropogenic effects).

    Do you have a link for these studies?

    The Earth is entering a period of minimum eccentricity which reduces the influence of precession. This page in the IPCC warmist propaganda report gives an overview with references that you can look up yourself. Specifically, I got the 50-ka figure from Berger and Loutre, 2002, which is behind a paywall, so I didn’t read it.

    Archer and Ganopolski, 2005 is an interesting paper that considers how anthropogenic CO2 will affect the impending glaciation.

  149. It looks as if you in America can’t claim all the record bad weather, you have to share it with us. But don’t for heavens sake confuse it with climate, you have to understand there is a vast difference between cold weather and climate.

    telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8203890/UK-weather-will-this-winter-be-as-bad-as-1962.html

  150. Anonymous Howard says:
    December 15, 2010 at 11:45 am

    The Earth is entering a period of minimum eccentricity which reduces the influence of precession. This page in the IPCC warmist propaganda report gives an overview with references that you can look up yourself. Specifically, I got the 50-ka figure from Berger and Loutre, 2002, which is behind a paywall, so I didn’t read it.

    Your links are weak Howard, the ice core record also does not match your idea, if anything it suggests we are long overdue for a sudden slide into another glacial period. You might have to supply better links before you gain my respect.

  151. We got 168 mm of Rain in the last 3 days !
    water is peeling off of the mountains into the river gorges in biblical proportions .

  152. Anna informed me that wind snapped the tops off 2 large pine trees in the yard at our home
    south of Brandon, MO. That’s not normal, nor was the Jan ’09 devastating ice storm.

  153. not one mention of solar activity or lack of it that I was able to find in about reading comments for about 30 mins here I think the Russians have the records that predate ours look at the old buildings there it is a known fact that in the 1500’s there was very little sunspot activity and they got lots of cold and snow and lots of it. no sunspots and more cold go figgure hu? but hey the super putors dont allow that into the mix so it just can not happen ever so as the earth cools due to reduced out put from the sun they keep feeding us more bs about the warming of the earth. time will tell the truth here.

  154. http://www.accuweather.com/us/ak/fairbanks/99701/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    Fairbanks, AK: 11 F below average thus far in December. I guess the Arctic is getting its share of cold!

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/al/birmingham/35201/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    Birmingham, AL: 9 F below average thus far in December.

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/mn/international-falls/56649/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    International Falls, MN: 8 F below average thus far in December.

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/fl/jacksonville/32099/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    Jacksonville, FL: 11 F below average thus far in December.

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/sc/charleston/29401/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    Charleston, SC: 9 F below average thus far in December.

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/tn/memphis/37501/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    Memphis, TN: Just 5 F below average thus far in December. Just five.

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/oh/minerva/44657/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    My hometown of Minerva, OH: 7 F below average thus far in December. VERY, VERY snowy, so there goes R. Gates’ “drier” bull fecal mater. 16.3 inches of snow, and we’re just half-way through the month — note that we’re 80 miles from the Lake. Let’s try Cleveland, OH next.

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/oh/cleveland/44101/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    Cleveland, OH: 5 F below average, and 11.9 inches of snow…so far.

    http://www.accuweather.com/us/ky/louisville/40201/forecast-month.asp?view=table

    Louisville, KY: 9 F below average — they’ve failed to hit the average LOW for their high temperature 4 times, failed to hit their average temperature 12 of 14 days, met average two times, and exceeded average two times.

    Record cold spring in AUSTRALIA…Record snow and cold in Europe and the UK…gee, this sounds like GLOBAL COOLING. You don’t remember, back in the 70’s? You know, before the temperatures started their inexorable climb from abnormal cold and the scientific community needed more grant money against a new foe…

    Just give it up already. Lies are not science, they are what keep these frauds we call “the scientific community” from going broke. Follow the money.

  155. Can anyone tell me what would happen if the Carbon Dioxide Sink, the Atlantic Ocean Current Conveyor, stopped removing Carbon Dioxide?

    Because that is what is happening, along with all the other reasons for us not to worry about Global Warming, we in fact may be looking at a quick onset Ice Age. Just like the last Ice Age 13,000 years ago. That one was caused by an Ice Dam breaking in Northern Canada, which allowed billions of gallons of fresh water into the North Atlantic, I don’t remember the actions of this fresh water; but it stopped the Current in the Atlantic, the North Atlantic became colder finally freezing over. Ice Age! The first stages are unusual weather patterns in areas that were normally moderated by the winds off the warmer sea currents. Eastern US and UK primarily, and where are the weather anomalies right now?

  156. See Al about to get Gored by an inconvenient tooth here: /Users/gortry/Desktop/iPhoto Library/Originals/2010/15-Dec-10_8/ s1.jpg

Comments are closed.