Guest post by Steven Goddard
“April comes in like a lion, and stays that way.”
The University Of Colorado in Boulder and nearby Colorado State University are hotbeds of climate science activity. Famous climate names from both sides of the AGW aisle like NCAR, NSIDC, the Pielkes, Bill Gray and Chris Landsea are associated with these universities. Earlier this extended winter WUWT reported on one forecast by a CU geography professor :
University of Colorado-Boulder geography professor Mark Williams said Monday that the resorts should be in fairly good shape the next 25 years, but after that there will be less snowpack – or no snow at all – at the base areas
No doubt that a geography professor would have the correct skill set to be making ski forecasts 25 years in the future, and that 25 years from now the climate will make a radical switch. It appears that Dr. Williams forecast is correct so far, as Colorado is getting lots of snow.
Wolf Creek Ski Area has received more than 11 metres of snow this winter, and has 118 inches of snow on the ground. (That would be 2.9972 metres deep, using the Catlin tape measure.) Unfortunately, people may be unable to get to most of the ski areas because Interstate 70 is shut down – due to too much snow.
Ahead of the current storm, all of the snowtel sites in Colorado were reporting normal snowpack.
| RIVER BASIN | PERCENT OF AVERAGE | ||
| Snow Water | Accum | ||
| GUNNISON RIVER BASIN | 109 | 108 | |
| UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN | 112 | 109 | |
| SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN | 98 | 97 | |
| LARAMIE AND NORTH PLATTE RIVER BASINS | 103 | 105 | |
| YAMPA AND WHITE RIVER BASINS | 113 | 109 | |
| ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN | 107 | 99 | |
| UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN | 104 | 107 | |
| SAN MIGUEL, DOLORES, ANIMAS & SAN JUAN | 95 | 10 | |
One popular AGW theory of convenience is that warming temperatures bring more snow. As can be seen below, this might not be an adequate explanation.
http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/products/maps/acis/hprcc/MonthTDeptHPRCC.png
Of course, weather is not climate and the earth has a 50/50 chance of “tipping” in the future – due to reaching some mythical CO2 threshold.
On a more urgent note, a US Navy researcher from told the Beeb that projections of an ice free Arctic by 2013 may be “too conservative.”
“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,” the researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, explained to the BBC. “So given that fact, you can argue that may be our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.”
(This California based researcher did not accompany the Catlin expedition on their -40C Arctic camping trip this spring.)
Polar Bear pondering how cap-and-trade may brighten it’s future?
If you want to save the ski industry and the polar bears, you might want to consider sending Al Gore some money – and please quit producing so much of that dangerous pollutant CO2. However, absolutely do not try to apologize to the bears in person. Skiing is much more fun and generally safer than swimming with polar bears, as this woman visiting the Berlin Zoo found out.
PHOTO: WWW.TELEGRAPH.CO.UK
I just don’t know how to get to any ski areas without making lots of CO2.
To add a little perspective to the post:
Surfacestations.org evaluation:
USHCN 050848
BOULDER, CO
MAX-MIN THERMOMETERS
CRS within 10m of concrete walk, 30m ashpalt
parking lot
CRN3 rating
Urban/1,970t
bright/lights=37
mountainous valley
COOL CONIFER
TRENDS:
NOAA Raw: +0.004°C/year
Raw+TOBS: +0.003°C/year
FILNET: +0.001°C/year
(According to the NOAA/USHCN1 web page, FILNET program includes Raw, TOBS, MMTS, SHAP, missing data, and outlier adjustments, inter alia)
One of the relatively few stations where NOAA adjusted data is actually cooler than the raw data.
Recent trend is anomalous: Very little trend at all during the 1980-2000 warming event, followed by a significant upward spike after the year 2000, directly opposite of the observed national and world trend.
Station has been popping around like a jack-in-the-box. MMS indicates five station moves since 1948 (not reflected in Updates or Location section but indicated on their map). I wonder how that might have affected the more recent readings. If the change was < 0.5°C, no outlier adjustment would have been applied, but any spurious effects from the move(s) would just go straight into the record, possibly swamping the actual measurements.
http://gallery.surfacestations.org/main.php?g2_itemId=1699
Ron de Haan (20:03:26) :
That site is full of hand wringing worry warts. I could smell the fear. Liked how the moderator personally called out Anthony. Way to go Mr. Watts, stay under their skin.
Smokey (20:21:26) :
Ron de Haan (20:03:26),
I’m glad you and other folks are keeping an eye on whackjob sites like climateprogress, because I don’t bother.
But I checked out your link. In fact, I read all the comments, and the central message I got was “What if…”.
They’re saying ‘you just wait until next year when the climate catastrophe hits,’ or similar ravings.
No wonder climateprogress didn’t even make the final cut. They sound like a UFO contingent.”
Smokey,
As clear as ever.
I did not visit the site you mention.
The link was taken from Moreno’s “climate depot”.
I really think he is doing a good job especially because he publishes all the links from WUWT postings and other good sites.
If he will generate as much hits as WUWT? I doubt it.
By the way, how does a UFO contingent sound?
I once scouted a blond UFO when I was very drunk but she had already left when I woke up.
I’ve been watching the weather for two predictions:
On March 27, Piers Corbyn of Weather Action, claimed
~~~~~~~
=> Around 11-15 April North USA / South Canada – Massive disruptive snow deluges and major storms of extreme wind snow and rain / sleet / hail eg South Central Canada (Lake Superior included) and North Central USA ( eg Minnesota) More snow and extreme hail/rain .
=> Around 23-28 April. Central west America Major Thunder & hail eg Colorado Mountains and south to Navada [sic].
~~~~~~~
I think if I detrend, invert, and do a multi-week running average and a geographical stretching there should be a major snow storm over Boulder on or about April 18. Bulls eye!
“…That would be 2.9972 metres deep, using the Catlin tape measure. …”
Ouch!
Ron de Haan,
Thanks for the tip, I’ll have to check out climate depot. I liked Moreno’s feistiness when he out-debated Romm.
“I just don’t know how to get to any ski areas without making lots of CO2.”
Walk and have your supplies flown in by an aircraft at least a twin engine every few days.
That will show those that drive there with there SUV how committed you are to reduce CO2 never mind all the fuel those aircraft burn.
Don’t forget those awesome batteries you need to heat first on your camp stove before you can use them in your LED flashlight.
You could always get Prince Charles to sponsor the trip… of course you might have to drill a few holes…
“By the way, how does a UFO contingent sound?
I once scouted a blond UFO when I was very drunk but she had already left when I woke up.”
I like girls with tatoos. That way I know that they are very capable of making bad decisions…
Yes, weather isn’t climate. Weather actually matters.
Robert Bateman (20:02:35) :
The AGW Polar Melting Oceans Rising Phony Arctic Surveys reminds me of an historical hoax: The Piltdown Man.
Do they even remember who claimed Ice Age 30 years ago?
**********************
Wasn’t “Piltdown” Michael Mann’s middle name?
I’m sure I read recently about a certain dendrochronologist named Michael “Piltdown” Mann.
Regards, Allan :^)
Reply: You’re looking for this post on CA. ~charles the moderator
“One popular AGW theory of convenience is that warming temperatures bring more snow. As can be seen below, this might not be an adequate explanation.”
Warming might explain how the water vapor got there in the first place, but it sure as hell doesn’t explain how the H²O got cold enough to actually condense and freeze. Just another crock of “robust” AGW theory.
It’s a good thing the forecasting for this snow wasn’t based on the Catlin’s geographically and mathematically challenged methods, else the snow forecast would have called for all that snow to fall in Wyoming — and with only a couples inches of it at that.
More from NASA on precipitation. Lots of graphs at the link.
World precipitation peaked just after 1970. The fall from there was especially pronounced in the SH. Although the dataset only goes up to 1988.
A warmer world is a wetter world, and a drier world is almost certainly a cooler world.
The precipitation data indicates the late 20th C warming may well be spurious (UHI etc)
Despite what NASA says precipitation data has nothing like the site specific issues temperature data has. No equivalent of airconditioners.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1997/1997_Dai_etal_2.pdf
[snip – no 9/11 truther links allowed on this forum – Anthony]
National Meteorological Services (SNM) in Mexico has predicted scorching temperatures of 50 C (122 F) the next summer for states on the Anahuac Plateau, for example, Durango, San Luis Potosi, Guanajuato, Mexico and Federal District. They attribute those cooking temperatures to AGW. They made predictions on the same tenor last year, predicting 45 C for the same states. They failed and will fail again.
Here in my Monterey, the opening and the first two weeks of spring season has been fairly nice, compared with usual temperatures in the past, with temperatures no higher than 36 C (97 F). In March, we had only two days when temperatures went up to 40 C (104 F) due to west winds. We expect a drop of temperature down to 15 C (59 F) the next Monday.
I had to jump over to ClimateProgress.org and check it out. I must confess that this is my first time over there. ClimateProgress.org is a comic relief blog right? It must be with quotes like:
Of course, they didn’t mention how we have been down this road before, and well, it hasn’t really worked out so well. But, I’m sure just because it wasn’t “big enough”.
I had a good chuckle reading the posts over there. Heck of a way to live, in such fear and all. If you don’t do it already, I do recommend venturing around to some of these other blogs (of the warming kind) and try to gain a little perspective in how others view things. I find it interesting how little scientific material and empirical data is ever presented at these sites. That is just one of many areas where WUWT has the upper hand.
Keep it real people! 🙂
40 to 60 percent of Oklahoma’s wheat crop destroyed by April freeze.
Ron,
“…there is no significant change in temperatures from 1995 until 2001 and cooling from 2001 up to now.”
I’m having some problems fitting these trends to the data:
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/1866/trends.png
Do you have a plot which better illustrates this?
Christopher Booker, the voice of reason, has another good article this morning:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5177468/Save-the-planet-rhetoric-soars-to-crazy-new-heights.html
I have to add that it isn’t only GCSE Physics papers that are incredibly biased towards warmist theory. The Biology and Chemistry papers are too.
New Labour educational policy: Give us your children until 16 and we’ll give you brainwashed adults pliable to do our bidding.
They wish!
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2009/03/26/st-andrews-university-global-warming-loses-in-formal-debate/
NuLab might try and stamp out free will and common sense by social engineering or legislation but they’ll never kill them. Not while sites like WUWT exist. I and many of my friends and collegues thank you for bringing sanity into our lives.
I’m just thinking of that other area of human endeavour which is (was) dominated by computer models made by the “best brains” on the planet (and a few other scams as well): investment finance.
What would happen if I pontificated to the Beep that the current problems are just a lull in a long-term trend and that in 25 years time we still all be millionaires?
I know what would happen to me: I’d be taken away by men in white coates.
UK Sceptic,
From Booker’s article:
“..the latest available data show the downward trend in global temperatures continuing.”
rather seems to be contradicted by the plots of the positive trend just presented on this site a couple of days ago:
http://rankexploits.com/musings/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/1979trends.jpg
Do you think Booker, like Philip_B, has difficulty reading these graphs?
“in 25 years time we still all be millionaires”
Possible, but a cup of coffee will be $1000.00
it’s all relative.
There’s well above average temperatures here in the Western United States, and more in the forecast for the next few days. But it’s not record heat. I am fairly certain this warmth will be blamed on global warming though it isn’t even record heat.
On the other hand, the record cold that happened over and over this past winter in the United States has been called “weather”.
I think most folks can see what’s really going on.
Ron de Haan (20:03:26) :
The IPCC has given up to report on the current climate trends.
Why? Because there is no significant change in temperatures from 1995 until 2001 and cooling from 2001 up to now. And all this despite increased levels of CO2.
If you don’t believe me, read the entire post here:
http://climateprogress.org/2009/04/15/ipcc-2014-fifth-assessment-irrelevant/#comment-39812
I had a look at this site, a great deal of hot air, not much evidence.