And that’s not all, for the week ending Dec 13th, there were 815 new snowfall records set. December 2009 is shaping up to be quite the snowmaker. Here’s a map showing continental USA records:
Here is the daily count data from NCDC, with links to tabular reports and source for the snowfall records:
Dec 20th 124
Dec 21st 50
Dec 22nd 75
Dec 23rd 71
Dec 24th 170
Dec 25th 235
Dec 26th 152
Total 877 (CONUS and Alaska)
Many of the records have been bested significantly, and there were a number of all time records broken as well.
For example, December 24th and 25th all time records:
Click tables for original source reports from NCDC.
Note that we saw the majority of records from the most recent snowstorm in places that are fairly far south of the major USA snow belt.
| 24 December 2009 | Lat | Lon | ASOS/
COOP |
COOP/
WBAN ID* |
Record
New (4) Tied (0) |
Previous
Record |
Previous
Date |
Period
of Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UNIV OF MINN ST PAUL, MN | 44.98 | -93.18 | COOP | 218450 | 6.7 in | 4.0 in | 9 Dec 2009 | 31 |
| SHERBURN 3 WSW, MN | 43.63 | -94.77 | COOP | 217602 | 4.0 in | 3.0 in | 22 Dec 2009 | 62 |
| OK CITY WILL ROGERS AP, OK (KOKC) | 35.39 | -97.60 | ASOS | 346661 | 14.1 in | 8.4 in | 10 Mar 1948 | 69 |
| POST, TX | 33.20 | -101.37 | COOP | 417206 | 9.2 in | 9.0 in | 15 Mar 1969 | 100 |
Sponsored IT training links:
Incredible online 642-072 training program to help you pass 1Y0-A17 and 1Y0-A05 exam in easy and fast way.
more news on climategate
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1238638/Chinese-hackers-linked-Warmergate-climate-change-leaked-emails-controversy.html
Aren’t we supposed to be in mild El-Nino condiions? Isn’t that supposed to be making us warmer?
that MUST be all those M $ of carbon credits that we’ve traded that are cooling our weather! Proof positive that trading carbon credits is SAVING us! 🙂
Must be Global warming, heaven help them poley bears.
Imagine swimming because of no Ice floes, because Tinkerbell from Disney Land sprinkled pixie dust, now the little rascal sprinkles more fairy dust and snow everywhere, Calling Peter Hansen, tell tinks to stop being naughty.
All them flocks of Poley bears are gonna drown, from carrying too much snow.
That’s not snow,it’s merely “soft hail” and its obviously due to global warming, I mean climate change, I mean the climate crisis. /sarc
Could someone compile a list of all the record low, snowfall, rainfall, and record low maximum temps for 2009?
It’d be especially interesting to have them for the whole world, but just the USA would also be good.
Makes me wonder WTH these people are smoking/drinking/snorting as they claim 2009 is the warmest year ever and 2010 will be even warmer.
First Legal Action Filed Today With EPA CO2 Endangerment Finding Challenged
http://pr-canada.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=153980&Itemid=65
1692 total for those 2 weeks in December.
There was also the 304 low temperature, and 403 lowest max temperature records (i.e. record cold) set Dec 6-14—what a travesty!
A December that was climate and not weather. 😉
somebody needs prayer: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00659/Al-Gore_659811a.jpg
We were told at the very beginning to expect severe weather conditions, I don’t remember anyone mentioning cold extreme weather conditions, but they will now. If you believe in AGW every event confirms that belief, just like any other religion.
Here we go again! The records at NOAA are wrong or incomplete. At least one record is totally missing in that on 12/24 Will Rogers Airport in Oklahoma City got 14+ inches with previous record at two plus inches in the 80s. Not even mentioned in the 877.
I know. I got caught in the blizzard traveling 20 miles to my grandkids home on Christmas eve. Damnest thing I’ve every been in. Couldn’t see 100 feet at best in front of the car. It was 28 degrees outside, inside the car it was 90 degrees with defrost only setting and fan blowing hard but not enough heat to keep the windshield and wipers from freezing over ever 6 blocks or so, stop, get out, scrape, back-in for next segment for hour and a half. Lucky I didn’t get hit from cars behind. Fifty plus steady crosswind. Semis blown over. Cars literally blown off the road.
Makes me want to find why calculating wind chill doesn’t appear correct after that experience. I’ve been in snow with it -5 degrees and no wind with defroster able to keep up. What’s up?
If you’ve never been in a blizzard, believe me, think twice!!
wheres Al Gore – Im sure he must be in the middle of this snow!
Whoever said the payola and the record industry were dead.?
Now that’s curious, when I go to the “Dec 24th 170” link, Oklhoma only has two entries, no Will Rogers International but, sorry, I missed the entry within the story itself.
NOAA records seem not to be CONSISTENT, apparently not totally missing.
cold hot (01:31:21) :
That’s not snow,it’s merely “soft hail”
—————-
Rotted hail.
For what it’s worth, Peirs Corbyn says worse to come. He was a few day’s ahead of himself with what we’ve already had so maybe first few days of January?
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews09No103.pdf
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv_aueaCtng&hl=en_GB&fs=1&]
It’s cold in the NH now, but likely to get much colder. The CAGW hypothesis does not explain how this can be happening, as CO2 levels have continued to rise while the Earth has cooled dramatically.
We need to do some urgent research as to what’s going on so that steps can be taken to prepare the population for more severe winters and cooler, shorter summers. The sun seems to be implicated in this cooling and the mechanisms of cause and effect need to be discovered.
The fall-out from Climategate is going to change the face of politics, science and the power balance of the world. I find it ironic that after spending all that money to prove the link between CO2 and climate, mother nature herself has decided to take matters into her own hands.
Mankind is nothing more than a pimple on the backside of an elephant, and the harsh lessons we are going to learn over the next few decades will help everyone understand this important fact. Survival of our species depends on it.
Gregg E wrote: “Makes me wonder WTH these people are smoking/drinking/snorting as they claim 2009 is the warmest year ever and 2010 will be even warmer.”
Ah, but you are way out of date my friend. It’s not the raw data that counts. Pfft to the raw data, we can throw that away as fast at possible. What’s valuable is the adjusted data. Once the data for 2009 is adjusted in accordance with ‘internationally accepted standards’ it will prove that 2009 was one of the hottest years ever.
I say this with total confidence even though I have at the moment no idea of what the raw data might show beyond lots of cold, cold, cold. I have full confidence in Jones, Mann and their merry Cru. They have after all proved themselves over and over again.
You may wonder how the old augers, oracles etc managed to survive for so many centuries when they had no special knowledge of what the future might bring. The ‘trick’ is to make sure that no matter what happens it is loudly proclaimed as exactly what was expected, no matter how it differs from what was previously said.
That’s a lot of 1-ups on the scoreboard this month. But, by next month, you know what they will score Dec. 2009 as, the x-warmest.
It will take a full-fledged disaster to put the chill down the spine of those spinning mythical yarn. When the maddened crowds with torches and pitchforks come calling.
Gregg E. (01:35:02) :
Makes me wonder WTH these people are smoking/drinking/snorting
I could say they drank the kool–aid. But they didn’t. They had both eyes open and acted with intention (for whatever reason). They weren’t on any judgment altering drug. ClimateGate emails, and especially ClimateGate computer code, showed us that.
In a way I do agree with Fred Singer, that I can feel some sympathy for them while not at all condoning what they did,
found at 7:04 to 7:37 of this video
22c here in Sydney, Australia today. Pretty cool for summer, but at ~90% humidity it’s very sticky.
Back home in Aberfeldy, Perthshire, and not far from where his Lorship lives on Loch Rannoch, there is over 1 foot of lying snow and it is still snowing.
This Scottish December is very unusual. In my lifetime I only remember one similar one, in 1981, which was colder but not as snowy. There was another cold December in 1962 when I was a toddler so don’t remember it. That winter of 1962-63 was one of the worst in my father’s memory – the only one worse was in 1947. The UK winter of 1947 didn’t start until late January and it snowed for weeks until sometime in late March I think.
But it’s just weather…
>> It’s not the raw data that counts. What’s valuable is
>>the adjusted data. Once the data for 2009 is adjusted
>>in accordance with ‘internationally accepted standards’
>>it will prove that 2009 was one of the hottest years ever.
Ah yes, New World Politics in action, across the globe. We have had this in the UK for ten years.
In the UK, official school results have been going up for ten years, while universities and businesses have been claiming that standards have been falling rapidly. Again, it is the ‘adjusted’ school results that get published, not the real ones.
In this case, they just make the testing easier. This is a physics exam for UK 16-year olds. From pure physics, this exam has been downgraded to general knowledge questions on Green propaganda – about wind turbines, solar cells, pollution, radioactive waste, renewables, conservation, geothermal power and insulation.
http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-PHY1AP-W-QP-MAR08.PDF
Where are the equations? Where are the underlying principles of physics, the foundations of knowledge? Where is the science? Just where are tomorrow’s scientists and engineers going to come from??
In world politics, the inmates have taken over the asylum. It is time to take back control.
.
Interesting to verify that most os the cold deaths seem to correlate with these records:
http://ecotretas.blogspot.com/2009/12/december-2009-cold-death-toll.html
Ecotretas
As I understood Lubos’s post on cold records, he was essentially saying after 50 years warming a 1 in 100 year freak cold event could still break long-term cold records even in a warmer climate.
Surely these statistics give us an accurate confidence level for the absurd hypothesis?
If you fancy a giggle, check out this article from The Independent of 2000 which quotes ‘leading researchers’ from The Hadley centre and elsewhere telling us that snow in the UK is ‘a thing of the past’
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
Unfortunately, on the internet the links are updated even when the story isn’t. So, scroll to the bottom of the page in 2009 and what do you see?
“Met Office: more snow on the way”
Good old Independent.
I wonder what the Northern hemisphere anamoly will be. Cold in North America, Europa and China(Siberia is normal with all that cold).
2009 WUWT HIGHLIGHTS
This is the year the AGW hypothesis crumbled to pieces.
In addition to numerous cold weather events, reports of quiet solar activity, Arctic refreeze, FOIA stonewalling, surging scepticism, the Catlin folly, etc., the following are some of the more important WUWT highlights:
15 January:
WUWT VOTED BEST SCIENCE BLOG 2008
21 January
FAULTY ANTARCTIC PAPER BY STEIG; MANN ET AL
18 February
FAULTY NSIDC SATELLITE AND DATA
9 March
ICCC CONFERENCE
WATTS’ PAPER: IS US SURFACE TEMP RECORD RELIABLE?
2 April
NOAA STUDY SHOWS CLIMATE CHANGE NOT ALL MANMADE
17 April
EPA DECLARES CO2 “A DANGEROUS POLLUTANT”
18 April
STUDY: ONLY 34% BLAME HUMANS FOR GLOBAL WARMING
28 April
POLAR 5 SURVEY FINDS SURPRISINGLY THICK ICE
25 May
MIT NEW LOW, RELEASES ULTRA-KOOK GW STUDY
27 May
SOLAR ACTIVITY REACHES NEW LOW
2 June
NIPCC RELEASES 880 PAGE REPORT
8 June
PIELKE COMMENTS ON THE SCIENTIFIC PROCESS
20 June
MET OFFICE PREDICTS CLIMATE FOR REST OF CENTURY!
25 June
EPA SUPPRESSES SCIENCE
26 June
CLIMATE BILL PASSES HOUSE 219 – 212
23 July
MET OFFICE REFUSES TO RELEASE DATA
26 July
“DEEP COOL” MOLE LEAKS DATA TO MCINTYRE
30 July
AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY MEMBERS REVOLT
1 August
NCDC: NOW AN ADVOCACY GROUP, PHOTOSHOPS!
8 August
AWI POLARSTERN REPORTS LOTS OF ICE
13 August
CASPAR AND THE JESUS PAPER
21 August
SOLAR CYCLE 24 POSTPONED AGAIN
26 August
FORMER CSIRO DIRECTOR PROJECTS GLOBAL COOLING
5 September
EL NINO
7 September
SCIENTISTS’ 2009 SEA ICE PROJECTIONS MISS THE BARN
28 September
CLIMATE AUDIT: YAMAL DIVERGENCE PROBLEM
29 September
COSMIC RAYS 19% HIGHER
3 October
SOLAR CYCLE 24
9 October
OCEAN HEAT CONTENT DROPPING
23 October
GROWING SCEPTICISM
3 November
LINDZEN/CHOI PAPER
5 November
SCEPTICISM SPREADS TO FINNLAND
15 November
450 SCEPTICAL PEER-REVIWED PAPERS
19 November
CLIMATEGATE EXPOSED: “UNBELIEVABLE!”
23 November
GLENN BECK ON CLIMATEGATE
MONBIOT EXPERIENCES RARE MOMENT OF SANITY
25 November
NEW ZEALAND WARMING MANIPULATED
29 November
MSM REMAINS IN DENIAL
1 December
WUWT HOCKEY STICK
PHIL JONES STEPS DOWN
7 December
EPA COUP D’ETAT, NOW MORE POWERFUL THAN CONGRESS?
AMERICA SEES THE HOAX
14 December
REVKEN TO LEAVE NYT
19 December
COPENHAGEN LEAVES WARMISTS OUT IN THE COLD
21 December
MM ON FOX NEWS SPECIAL
22 December
WIKI-REVISIONISM
25 December
WHITE CHRISTMAS
26 December
DRAMATIC ATMOSPHERIC COOLING
Wishing everyone a happy and healthy New Year!
These highlights will be accompanied by the links shortly.
The UK experienced it’s coldest ever Christmas Eve, with a minimum recorded of -16c.
Didn’t see it reported anywhere, I can imagine the headlines if it was the mildest ever Christmas Eve however.
With four days to go, Lincoln, Nebraska has already had its snowiest December in the ~125 years records have been kept. I haven’t been keeping track, but I expect it will challenge the record for coldest December, also.
After CRU adjustments are applied, the snowfall totals will be deceased from 22.5 inches to ‘trace’, and we will learn that we’re actually now in the subtropical zone.
But at least Interstate 80 is open again.
Just for the record,
The above 2009 hihjlights are ny own that I chose from the WUWT site.
A few of the highlights actually come from CA, Bishop Hill or Air Vent.
20 years from now the value added data will show a warm, dry winter of 2009-2010.
And in Europe: thunderstorms!
Jeroen (04:25:59)
And in Siberia a hotspot
Jeroen (04:25:59) :
I wonder what the Northern hemisphere anamoly will be. Cold in North America, Europa and China(Siberia is normal with all that cold).
I expect the normal “hot spot” over Siberia
At what point does weather become climate? [Or at least have some passing familiarity with it?]
Anthony, thank you for this link to NCDC for snow records. How can we learn or track how many cold weather records were set in 2009 or 2008?
Climate Progress is screeming that the equater is very hot.
It always is. When that changes let us know.
One of the things that bothers me is television. It has been less than 50 years that we have seen video reports of storms elswhere. Just because they weren’t reported, doesn’t make them less severe. In my area, it was a cool summer. It means there are still unharvested fall crops. That I have never seen.
According to yesterday’s Burlington (Vermont) Free Press
“So far this winter, 10 inches of snow have fallen in Burlington, half the normal amount to date, according to the National Weather Service”
Current weather at the foot of Mt Mansfield is 40F and raining.
It’s enough to warm the cockles of the heart — no record for Buffalo this year, unlike 2001 when record snowfall of over a foot and a half was recorded on the day before and the day after Christmas.
Last night we got some snow — it looks like powdered sugar was sprinkled over the green grass — and it’ll probably all melt by this afternoon in the sun and above freezing temps.
Of course, this being Buffalo, we’ll probably get socked in New Year’s Eve.
It is getting harder and harder to ‘hide the decline’ from anyone who looks out the window.
Steve M. (05:41:22) :
Jeroen (04:25:59) :
“I wonder what the Northern hemisphere anamoly will be. Cold in North America, Europa and China(Siberia is normal with all that cold).”
“I expect the normal “hot spot” over Siberia”
I expect the average will be something like -36C instead of the ‘official, homogenised,pasteurised and adjusted’ average of about -40C thus giving a huge anomaly of +4C.
Looks to me like there’s a low centred over Montreal.
I don’t think Burlington Vermont is going to stay mild for long.
http://www.findlocalweather.com/weather_maps/temperature_north_america.html
It has been interesting to watch the huge blizzard out west lose it’s strength, once it was cut off from the warm, moist air and cold arctic air that fueled it. Pressures at its center have risen from down near 980 mb to 1008 mb in two days.
New Hampshire has been on the warm side, which depresses the ski industry, but is a great blessing for people like me who have farm chores to do outside. It looks like we have a 48 hour window of opportunity to free items from ice, before the next arctic blast hits us Monday. “The Other Dan” in Vermont will be glad to hear the cold air may squeeze 3 inches of snow from the moist air as it moves in, but I’ll likely be a sour puss.
What impresses me so far this winter is the size of the storms. (There is gossip of another East Coast Bomb over New Year’s.) I understand the warm and moist “fuel” for these storms is due to the El Nino generating a rich southern stream, but I don’t fully understand why the other aspect of these huge storms, the northern stream’s cold, is so extremely cold.
Anyone have any ideas?
Aligner
Corbyn seems to have hit the nail squarely on the head.
Jeroen (04:25:59) :
“I wonder what the Northern hemisphere anomaly will be. Cold in North America, Europa and China(Siberia is normal with all that cold).”
The UAH SST anomaly has been running about .5F warmer than last year. The overall anomaly has also been above last year. I’m guessing the overall UAH anomaly will come in around .3-.4 above the base while the NH will be a little lower.
O/T : Surprisingly, the wikipedia has a list of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
I stumbled across this list when i saw that William M. Connolley, a member of the RealClimate blogging outfit, edited the wikipedia article about Segalstad , removing the reference from the Segalstad article to above category. He did that in November. The reverse reference – pointing from the category to Segalstad – is still there. The logic behind this escapes me.
You learn so much from the wikipedia, especially from the edit history.
Met Office Press Release 25 February 2009
Coldest winter for a decade
Mild weather is expected to see out what remains of winter. Despite this, it is expected to be the coldest UK winter since 1995/96, according to provisional Met Office figures.
……………….
Peter Stott, Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Despite the cold winter this year, the trend to milder and wetter winters is expected to continue, with snow and frost becoming less of a feature in the future.
Ok, we can’t see any climate changes in our recent weather. Isn’t that what really matters. If the climate has changed due to 60 years of emissions shouldn’t it start showing up sometime? Well, maybe it has but it’s so minor that nobody can tell the difference with their senses.
The fact is no one is going to be able to notice a 1F change in climate within all the nature variations. Even 1C is pretty much beyond our ability to notice unless one happens to live right at a freezing line. This is what makes much of the AGW hullabaloo such nonsense.
Henry chance (05:50:41) :
Climate Progress is screaming that the equater is very hot.
It always is. When that changes let us know.
Now that there is loads of money for the victims of advanced cultures, the whole world will be forever screaming that they are hotter than ever. I doubt their temp reports will be ever be honest again.
Ano (05:41:24) :
“At what point does weather become climate? [Or at least have some passing familiarity with it?]”
Average global climate is an abstract concept which attempts to show changes in weather patterns over a long time period i.e. a trend.
However, weather systems are non-linear in behaviour and this makes accurate prediction of behaviour even a few weeks ahead impossible.
Both weather and climate exhibit deterministic chaos, with many systems operating in concert to produce the effects any observer experiences at any moment at a specific location on the Earth. So perhaps no surprise that climate scientist and meteorologists cannot speak with any certainty about what the future will bring.
Weather/climate are self similar on both metric and temporal scales, they change from moment to moment in a deterministic way without the assistance of man.
@Snowed in in the UK
Marvelous article! Thank goodness for the Internet and keen readers.
But greenies will ignore all this, unfortunately. They still need a vision of world justice, which often turns into anti-Americanism. Obama is in a strange place.
Look actually what this does is give the AGW believers an opportunity to say, see we told you more moisture was going to be in the air!!!!
Seems to me that the number of records has a lot to do with the number of stations at any one time, and how long they have been in operation. If the number of stations increases dramatically, there should be lots of records–both high and low temps, snow, etc. How is this accounted for? Does anybody know?
>>Where are the equations? Where are the underlying principles of physics, >>the foundations of knowledge? Where is the science? Just where are >>tomorrow’s scientists and engineers going to come from??
China, India, Russia, Brazil… anywhere the Global Warming Agenda isn’t taught in schools.
GISS, CRU, etc, can adjust all of the past temperatures.
They can’t fudge precipitation data.
“Leon Brozyna (06:06:59) :
…Of course, this being Buffalo, we’ll probably get socked in New Year’s Eve.”
Weather.com shows 30-60% chance of “snow showers” for 8 of the next 10 days.
Please please please insert a preemptive paragraph that will snuff out the inevitable response from the doomers who will obviously attribute this to agw.
Haven’t we offended the Sun in all of this somehow? He gives us all of this wonderful 20th & 21st Century warming, and we took credit for it. Now we are getting the cold shoulder.
P Gosselin (05:03:39) :
> 2009 WUWT HIGHLIGHTS
> 15 January:
> WUWT VOTED BEST SCIENCE BLOG 2008
> …
> These highlights will be accompanied by the links shortly.
Links for all of these (and everything else) are at http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/
We got our annual “crop report” this Christmas from my dad’s cousin in Iowa. My grandfather and his brother moved there from Holland with their families in the 1920s. Her comments about the summer and autumn of ’09 were: a very difficult harvest; cool to cold; the corn never matured like it is supposed to; dry when it was needed to be wet and wet when it was supposed to be dry, requiring that all of the corn had to be dried out in the silos. Key in her comments was that they’d “never seen it like this before.”
True, weather is not climate, but 90 years of serious seasonal observation (because their livelihood depended on it) seems important to me. It’s direct observation with a purpose. All that other GISS and CRU stuff is modeling and, as it seems, has been consistently incorrect in predicting climate change.
‘Baton down the hatches’ or close the shutters, build the woodpile high and store the provisions all the way to the ceiling!
The alarmists have all gone into hibernation……… their silence is deafening, it’s all back to conservation and ‘greenery’, let them sleep.
Flopenhagen was too much and now winter bites and bites hard.
I must say the cold winters are ever so slightly missed by the oldies but we ain’t prepared for snow in li’l’ ole England anymore, heaven help us if it turns into a 62/63.
I said at the beginning of 09, that I thought we were in for a cold winter and further cold ones after 09/10 -( 2009 a warm year?? – not in Europe or North America!).
The AMO is cooling and the sun’s heading for a deep solar minimum sequence – blah blah…………the Met Office said the British Winter -09/10 would be mild and wet.
Enough said.
AGW is dead.
3,000 world cold records in July left us with ………”the warmest July in 2,000 years!” Hundreds of new colds in November gave us an abnormally warm November. This shall be mere frosting. Likely the warmest December in the last 12,000 years.
Forget the main stream media. The real roots of this movement, strangely enough, are in grade school and collage teachers.
College teachers are out of touch with the real world. They live in the insulated bubble of academia. They go to school for so long, all they know is school. They never get any experience in the real world of any industry. Therefore, they preach the socialist agenda because it sounds good on paper. The young people they teach do not protest because they don’t know any better yet. Their parents continue to give money to these colleges because they have no idea what their children are actually learning.
Grade school teachers despite having increased course work on classroom management are not required to take many classes in science. They cannot teach science because they don’t understand it themselves. Global warming was introduced to my children through Scholastic Magazine given out at school. The magazine is used as part of the curriculum. The teachers never questioned it. The children were frightened by it and peer pressure keeps anyone from dissenting. The parents are learning about global warming from their children as in 1984.
In fact it is harder for me to protest the fraud of global warming at my own school than it is to protest in the media. I run the risk of alienating myself and my children at school.
If anybody would like to send my schools a note telling them to stop teaching the global warming fraud with reasons why, I would be grateful.
Here are the principal’s emails: Vince.DiGrandi@WappingersSchools.org
Tom.Stella@wappingersschools.org
Perhaps I can do the same for someone else.
Thanks in advance.
Patrick Davis (02:57:38) : Both sides of the pacific at the same temperature, I would use your same words to describe what happens here.
Pretty cool for summer, but at ~90% humidity it’s very sticky
Permanently covered skies and same humidity also. It looks like in the 1960´s.
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
Snowed in in the UK (04:12:22) : “fancy a giggle”
Snowed,
Thanks for the link to this story. Priceless! John
I find it curious that where most of the records are being set, is also where the glaciers will return.
God is going to finish off the global warming fraud this winter … Who says He doesn’t have a sense of humor.
Already, according to Politico, the Democrats are running for cover. Anyone know why all these science hoaxes that befuddle the world, from DDT on, are always pushed by Democrats. Want to take a guess?
From the way it looks, (that is looking at 12″ of new snow) the cap and scam of the Euro markets worked. They didn’t even have to actually change anything with the carbon level, in fact all they had to do was increase the corruption level-especially helpful since the mortgage scam market is down at the moment. Please, throw the bums out.
r,
You are absolutely correct in your assessment of education. I see a long term degradation in Western cultures because of this reduced knowledge being passed on to future generations. Once our edge is lost ideological wars become more likely.
“Jason S (07:43:31) :
Please please please insert a preemptive paragraph that will snuff out the inevitable response from the doomers who will obviously attribute this to agw…”
[sarcasm on]
The increasing frequency of extreme weather events is consistent with the theory of agw.
[/sarcasm off]
😉
r. you are full of it. I am a teacher. I see none of what you speak of in my districts. Your uninformed opinion is driving your statements, not serious investigation. This makes you no better than the agenda driven AGW’s whose “science” is based squarely on political opinion with precious few facts and analysis to back it up.
So here is my challenge. Back it up. Where is your data? What kind of serious investigation did you complete in order to arrive at your conclusion? Is this a local phenomenon or is it nation wide? Or Western Civilization wide? Step up to the plate and leave the platitudes behind.
Else you are an expert.
A has-been under pressure.
I have made an observation that the change in the Arctic Oscillation combined with El Nino could explain this weather pattern. Anyone care to discuss?
Snowed in in the UK (04:12:22) :
The Independant is still battling on in denial. Look at the story about ‘Climate Change in 2009’ at the bottom of the page. In it they say:
“…The situation was not helped by the selective leaking of private emails from a few climate change scientists.
This action, clearly calculated to cause maximum political damage before the Copenhagen summit, gave further impetus to the campaign of a few of the so-called “sceptics”, who seek every means available to discredit what is now very clear mainstream climate science. I suspect that history will regard this little flurry as comparable to the Battle of the Bulge – a last high impact but doomed counter-attack on what is ultimately an irresistible weight of evidence that underlines the gravest threat to human wellbeing. In any event it had almost no impact on the talks.”
@ r, and Richard M:
There are two other points to be made in regard to teachers:
* once they’ve had enough of teaching, they become activists and politicians; where that leads to was nicely on display at COP15.
* when female, they look at AGW and all which is connected to it solely as ‘pollution’ – which is of course anathema to a female mind …
(Being of that gender, I am allowed to point this out without being shouted down as being a macho you-know-what!)
“Forget the main stream media. The real roots of this movement, strangely enough, are in grade school and collage teachers.
College teachers are out of touch with the real world. They live in the insulated bubble of academia. They go to school for so long, all they know is school. They never get any experience in the real world of any industry. Therefore, they preach the socialist agenda because it sounds good on paper. The young people they teach do not protest because they don’t know any better yet. Their parents continue to give money to these colleges because they have no idea what their children are actually learning.
Grade school teachers despite having increased course work on classroom management are not required to take many classes in science. They cannot teach science because they don’t understand it themselves. Global warming was introduced to my children through Scholastic Magazine given out at school. The magazine is used as part of the curriculum. The teachers never questioned it. The children were frightened by it and peer pressure keeps anyone from dissenting. The parents are learning about global warming from their children as in 1984.
In fact it is harder for me to protest the fraud of global warming at my own school than it is to protest in the media. I run the risk of alienating myself and my children at school.
If anybody would like to send my schools a note telling them to stop teaching the global warming fraud with reasons why, I would be grateful. ”
I hope you at least teach your children the truth. It doesn’t matter how uncomfortable it is for them. Have them learn the true science behind it. Besides, it would be good for them to be skeptical with soft issues like GW, and when mature enough learn the real heavy stuff like 1984.
@ Pamela Gray (09:31:39) –
I am sorry if I have offended you with my post – I can name you a handful of prominent Labour politicians (female) who started out as teachers and have quite definitely not covered themselves in glory in their various posts as ministers. The former Home secretary Jacquie Smith is a ‘shining’ example.
Things might be different in the USA ..
Viv, all such agenda driven posts makes my blood boil. They are always posted as facts and not opinion. No one ever includes the exhaustive study done behind the conclusion. You included.
Stop. It makes you look like you are on the side of AGW and their corrupted scientific methods. How does your use of such ill-conceived methods bring about a conclusion you seem ready to hang your hat on?
I can name a handful of gay (but very closeted) politicians who don’t believe in AGW. What conclusion would you draw from that, given your method?
In my opinion, your conclusions regarding teachers and AGW hype is utter nonsense unless you can back it up with behavioral science worth a damn.
Re: Snowed in in the UK (04:12:22) : “fancy a giggle”
Even more hilarious, 2 weeks after the Independent published that “end of snow” article Britain had “White Tuesday”. I remember it well, I was one of the many people on that April day stranded for 12 hours at Luton Airport, because we were snowed in!
This is the biggest fun to watch. The entire AGW movement will start to collapse as soon as the mainstream media start to eat away at its foundation. Look at the bashing the MSM hacks already get in their comments sections…
Do you think our wonderful leaders are getting the hint yet?
Now back to observations and discussion that are centered on a higher road of discourse. I have been following the crazy jet stream and its confluence with the change in the Arctic Oscillation. Of note, lake affect snow has occurred East to West instead of the usual West to East direction. I think this is also causing the bizarre jet stream split with some sections flowing over the top Canada, a second leg flowing from North to South along the Pacific coast, and the lower leg following the typical El Nino track called the Pineapple Belt. This results in a mix of warmer and very moist pressure systems colliding with below normal cold systems. This kind of disturbed flow could result in snow much further South than normal and extremely variable weather throughout.
Who else has been following the change in the Arctic Oscillation? Could this be a multi-decadel change or is this an oscillation that can flip back and forth quickly? How long has this oscillation been known? What data do we have so far on its occurrence?
@ Pamela Gray (10:02:45) :
I understand what you are saying, and shall endeavour in future to make certain that I preface my remarks as based on personal observations.
OT:
sounds like a number of Senate Democrats may have thrown in the towel regarding cap and trade:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30984.html
most of them cite economic reasons, perhaps not willing to admit that the public is finally awakening to the biggest scam in history.
Pamela Gray, joe has only re-iterated his experience and maybe he shouldn’t have genarised about it being all teachers and schools.
The UK governement is pushing it down our throats with outragous TV adverts about MM global warming directly aimed at Children.
The wonderful carbon cycle diagram by NASA has a new URL, it’s here:
http://nasascience.nasa.gov/earth-science/oceanography/ocean-earth-system/ocean-carbon-cycle
Pamela,
I’m glad you are here and that your schools do not support global warming. Perhaps it is because you are there making sure they don’t. Thank you for that.
I’m talking about my children in my schools. The things my children’s friends say and what their parents say. The things they bring home and their assignments. I have seen this in their grade schools, their high schools and now college.
I have no other data and my bias is out in the open.
I did bring it up hear because I can’t really talk about this in my community. I would like to know what others are experiancing. After all, supression of free speach, especially peer pressure, is how we get into trouble like this.
Sandy (03:56:08) :
A statistical outlier of 50 – 100 year records being broken the opposite way that the climate is modeled to be headed is not possible. Too many signmas above for the warmth, and you don’t get to go back that far unless the climate has reversed itself.
Global Warming cannot cause record breaking Global Cooling events (China, Europe,USA, Canada) unless Global Warming itself was a figment of overactive imaginations.
I have 2 kids at school over here and they are taught AGW without any word of it being controversial. I had to tell my kids to just give the politically correct answers to tests, so their overall grades won’t suffer. I have taught them “the other side” myself.
It is a problem, for sure.
Just to complete the meteorological information for the past week, which for some reason was not reported in the above article, here is all of the data from the last weeks weather in the USA.
http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/7day/us.html?c=
You will see that there are actually slightly more WARM records than cold ones
Total Records: 2180
Rainfall: 1102
Snowfall: 872
High Temperatures: 26
Low Temperatures: 25
Lowest Max Temperatures: 57
Highest Min Temperatures: 98
Do you think our wonderful leaders are getting the hint yet?
Not yet, it would seem. They still appear in public sporting faces smeared with cookie stuff and matching shirts, claiming innocence.
The NZ moon man much respected by some farmers is predicting a cold miserable winter for NZ. See http://www.nzherald.co.nz/niwa/news/article.cfm?o_id=136&objectid=10593960&pnum=1
No doubt NIWA will be spinning their own version.
Surely no surprise to any regular here…but a preponderance of record highs or lows are the key. An extreme event here or there is not significant, but when record qtys of highs or lows occur (from an equivalent number of reporting stations), these are an unbiased indicator of where we truly are WRT actual GMT.
But AGW is a religion (and a political cause) It is impervious to facts. The only thing that may turn this around is if snows at lower latitudes but higher elevations cease to melt in summer, and ice caps significantly advance.
Steve F (10:07:16) :
Do you think our wonderful leaders are getting the hint yet?
No. You can yell at them for weeks and they don’t get the hint.
But the average person is getting it!
I did bring it up here… sorry typo. : )
Caleb (06:41:56) :
…the northern stream’s cold, is so extremely cold.
Anyone have any ideas?
—————————————————
A quiet sun may be the answer.
The energy from an active sun causes amplified heat flux from the ocean. With a quiet sun that amplified heat is lowered and earth cools, i.e., small variations in the sun are amplified in the oceans—“an amplification mechanism”. As Willie Soon puts it (paraphrased) the sun is big and earth is small and small variations from the sun have large effects on the earth.
Read here:
http://www.sciencebits.com/calorimeter
or here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/04/15/the-oceans-as-a-calorimeter/#more-7057
Since the entire AGW -‘Climate Change’ theatre has become religion –
Is it not time to invoke the separation of church and state? at least in the US.
I say to the ‘team’ – prove it, or declare it a religious movement and go to your churches but get out of the state funding, politics, etc.
We need to keep in mind that most teachers are simply following a curriculum developed by others. They also select the books that are used.
In many cases they don’t have much of a choice what they can say without getting into hot water themselves.
Here’s another good piece of news:
CAP & TRADE IS DEAD
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/27/dems-wave-white-flag-on-cap-and-trade/
Actually, this brings me to my list of top CLIMATE MOVERS-2009: These are the ones I think who have really made a difference, scientifically, politically or media-wise.
1. Steve McIntyre
2. The UEA CRU whistleblower
3. Sen. James Inhofe
4. Lord Monckton
5. Fred Singer
6. Richard Lindzen
7. Roger Pielke Sr.
8. Anthony Watts
9. Talk Radio, FOX News
10. Drudge Report, American Thinker and Hot Air
I’ll let others argue about the rankings.
There are also lots of other jounalists, bloggers, etc. who have made immense contributions.
oldgifford (06:53:35) :
Met Office Press Release 25 February 2009
Peter Stott, Climate Scientist at the Met Office, said: “Despite the cold winter this year, the trend to milder and wetter winters is expected to continue,
——————————–
Trend? The trend of the last three years is that winters are getting worse.
Does he want a larger data set than three years? Let’s go back to the Medieval Warm Period of 1000 years ago. Winters of the last 150 years are worse than then.
What trend is he talking about?
Samsung has begun airing a really annoying AGW commercial on NatGeo channel. It’s tag is “No Ice – No Winter Sports.” Anybody else seen it?
“Slioch (10:29:59) :
[…]
You will see that there are actually slightly more WARM records than cold ones”
Well – according to the AGW hypothesis we should have seen 60 years of unrelenting human induced warming by now. So we should be seeing MANY more warm records than cold records. Completely unquantified suggestion of course.
Richard M (07:00:03) :
Ok, we can’t see any climate changes in our recent weather. Isn’t that what really matters. If the climate has changed due to 60 years of emissions shouldn’t it start showing up sometime? Well, maybe it has but it’s so minor that nobody can tell the difference with their senses.
————————————–
The sun has been very quiet since early 2007. Our senses can feel that effect.
Anyone hear anything about vehicles using bio-diesel or even vegetable oil? Such a wonderful green technology, using renewable energy, heading straight on into temperatures that make the substances gel up.
I have read of systems using electric heaters for the fuel tank, while we are facing conditions that make these fuels turn to sludge in the lines going to the engine. One has to hope they have enough reserve battery power to both warm the tank and start up the cold engine. Other proposals are dual-fuel and possibly dual-engine, use a conventional fuel until things warm up then switch over. Regular highway diesel has additives to prevent gelling. For dual-engine, start with gasoline or something more eco-friendly like ethanol.
How well are the all-electric vehicles doing in the cold? Did they ever field-test a Tesla roadster in Siberia?
Innocentious (07:11:45) :
Look actually what this does is give the AGW believers an opportunity to say, see we told you more moisture was going to be in the air!!!!
——————————–
That moisture was supposed to be in the form of hurricanes, typhoons, torrential rains, etc, not in late fall and early winter record blizzards.
“This action, clearly calculated to cause maximum political damage before the Copenhagen summit…”
Deconstruct people’s motivations; never address their truth claims — you can never demonstrate to these people that they are wrong, for they merely reinterpret your motivation for trying to prove them wrong and ascribe it to nefarious impulses. Heaven forbid you do it merely because you have a healthy curiosity in science!
It is a real problem if scientists themselves have grown up amongst and influenced by this culture where you defend the indifensible by just accusing your critics of being “evil”. It is basically the end of the scientific method. How can it possibly survive, if you never let real critics have a say? If findings can never be checked? It turns science into power games, nothing more.
It is an opportunity for others to step in and take over the sacred task of the pursuit of knowledge.
Ahhhhh, those were the days from the BBC. They must wish now that they had kept up their more balanced reporting.
Viewpoint: Get off warming bandwagon
By Professor William M Gray of Colorado State University
Thursday, 16 November, 2000
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm
Questioning global warming
By BBC News Online’s Jonathan Amos
Tuesday, 14 November, 2000
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1017204.stm
The real work in climate science is being muffled by the pollies with the megaphones.
So, this is how we get a seemingly mild Christmas forecast with the worst is over when you have Piers Corbyn predicting months out what was just suffered, round 2 just about to hit, and round 3 in January. The standard weather models can’t do this, as they are tied to the warming theories.
It’s a shame, really, to see meteorology dragging a ball & chain around in the 21st Century.
kadaka (11:46:17) :
Tell any Haitian about how bio-fuels are good for the planet.
I suspect that most U.S science teachers lack the range/depth of skills to have been able to see through the B.S. but a more in depth analysis would be interesting. I would be intrigued to find if many have kept their personal views shuttered out of political correctness.
Not unlike the situation where 70% of meteorologists think CAGW is a major exaggeration, but will rarely speak out on their local broadcasts. (Probably influenced by programming direction, but not entirely).
Pamela Gray (10:02:45)
“In my opinion, your conclusions regarding teachers and AGW hype is utter nonsense…”
Ben Santer
Scientist, educator, and school yard bully.
P Gosselin (11:33:22) :
I was going to suggest putting the UEA CRU whistle blower at the top of the list as that event was a singular tipping point, but there would likely have been another event in the future if this one didn’t happen, and it was McIntyre’s tireless and brilliant due diligence that “allowed” many of these e-mails to have to have been written, so, I agree with McIntyre being #1. Regarding #2, I would suggest it is Anthony and Company, and the whistle blower is 3rd.
Pieter F (08:00:18) :
…90 years of serious seasonal observation… seems important to me. It’s direct observation with a purpose. All that other GISS and CRU stuff is modeling and, as it seems, has been consistently incorrect in predicting climate change.
———————————————————–
Freeman Dyson seems to agree with that:
“My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak. But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in. The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds. That is why the climate model experts end up believing their own models.”
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dysonf07/dysonf07_index.html
Two kids in school does not a reliable conclusion based on sound research make. When I say back it up, don’t give me the, “My kids are being indoctrinated” remark. That isn’t a sound research based conclusion and you know it. It is your biased unresearched opinion. State it as such or I will call you on it. We don’t let AGW posters get away with it. Neither should we let ourselves get away with it.
Slioch (10:29:59) :
There’s always a small number of cold and warm records broken like the ones you point out in your comment. What is noteworthy is the large number of snowfall records. These were not predicted to happen in global warming.
PeterM NZ (10:37:57) :
The Farmers Almanac is predicting a clod winter in the US.
Pamela Gray says:
December 27, 2009 at 9:31 am
interesting. My then 15 YO son returned from school 2 years ago full of global warming talk. I asked where he got the information from. His teacher was instructing the class about AWG and all the ensuring consequences from melting poles to species extinction. I was incensed – downloaded alot of anti AGW info from WUWT and told him to read it. My son still wasn’t convinced and preferred to believe the teacher because they “know more than you Dad”. I rang both the teacher and the form dean and learned AWG was part of the curriculum. I live in NZ so not perhaps relevent your experiences.
D. King (12:12:08) :
Ben Santer aiming his message at the only group of people he is able to influence—children.
Adults are too much for you, hey Ben?
It has certainly been cold in some parts of the Northern Hemisphere this winter timed almost to perfection for the Copenhagen Fearfest. What I cannot understand is why this is not reflected in Arctic Ice Extent?
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
It seems to be headed the other way. Are there other factors at play here or do the warmists still have a case?
Well I would venture a guess, that in 2009, besides the record new snow falls, there were also new records set in the plain silliness of the utterances of global warming climate change CO2 Polar Bear worry warts.
Try this one on for size; fresh from last night’s T&V news broadcast on ABC television; well specifically from San Francisco’s Channel 4. Now honestly I can’t remember whether I watched it on the 16:9 720P or the 4:3 480i; but it was on Channel 4.
Now my policy towards T&V news broadasts, is exactly the same as it is towards newspapers such as the San Jose Murky News, or the New York Times.
I hold the person whose name appears with the story personally responsible for the absolute accuracy of ANY and every story they write/ attach their name to. Sametimes it maybe AP who is responsible; which I take to mean Accurate Presentation.
In any case I expect EVERY newsperson/Columnist/Journalist who presents anything in the public NEWS media to check the scientific accuracy of EVERYTHING they print; by citing the authors and peer reviewed journal, if published, and the name of a second source they checked with to venrfy the scientific accuracy of the story. Well the only exception is if the reporter/reportress personally conducted the research and is reportressing his/er own results.
So last night’s story just has to be correct because it was on Television, and they wouldn’t lie. Maybe someone can locate the peer reviewed journal this was published in.
According to last nights story, animals will have to migrate a quarter mile per year to keep up with their comfort zone just because of global warming climate change CO2 increase.
Now they didn’t elaborate whether that was north/south/east or west; or whether they all move in all directions; maybe they just swap places.
Now I don’t know how many National Geographic TV shows I have seen, in which some growing lion cubs (male) got chased out of their Pride, to go find themselves a new habitat not already occupied by some ornery lions, and hopefully some food species also got chased out of their place to the new lion’s spot; maybe by grass getting up and moving to a healthier spot.
No I don’t know the names of the fools who are promoting this idiotic thesis; they evidently don’t know that great white Sharks migrate thousands of miles here and there all the time; probably looking for that next fur bag they are going to turn into mush..
Now I don’t know whether somebody’s supercomputer discovered this amazing fact, or whether these scientists have a world wide animal species migration network that keeps track of the centroid of the world’s elephants or maybe the locust and termites too.
Bur how would you distinguish one termite who just moved his quarter mile from another that simply grew there.
Hey animals (dumb things) do the same thing that humans do when shopping in the mall, or driving down the freeway. Everybody moves into the empty space/lane; maybe it’s called the ballroom dancing effect. When you are shepheding your partner or are being shepherded around the Ballroom, you instinctively keep your elbows out in the classical ballroom dancing stance. This is for the purpose of nudgeing the couple next to you out of the way, so you can “dance through”, and head for that open spot on the floor what which to display your ballroom prowess.
Well you see everybody is heading for that spot, and that is going to create a vaccuum somewhere else on the floor, and soon people will head for that place.
So random migration is part of our psyche, and everything always does it. Weeds get up and move to some empty ground to try and escape the crowds, or maybe the RoundUp.
Any way this 1/4 mile annual dance shuffle has to be the dumbest scientific theory I have ever heard. These people will stop at nothing to scare the ehell out of all of us. In case you haven’t noticed those places on earth, that have already way overpopulated their own territory, engage in mass emigration to some empty place (relatively), in order to continue their profligate ways there.
The USA for example is viewed as a wide open uninhabited expansion territory by peoples who are used to doing the ballroom shuffle anywhere in their own country.
Gaia has programmed everybody, and everything to move to the empty space, wherever it is. Movable “Holes” were discovered, long before the semiconductor solid state Physics of such things was written down.
So how about it ABC/channel 4; where did you come up with that insane story.
P Gossling!
Finlands TV is a runner up on your list.Thier climatexperts doesnt recognize their own temp data after CRU handling. Seems to be a Nordic consensus.
What the [snip] is this??? They also comment on Russian and Spetsbergen data!!
Repy: It is possible to communicate effectively without the use of profanity or obscured profanity. people posting comments here violate this precept at the risks of comments being deleted in their entirety. ~ charles the getting very tired of this reminder moderator
AGW being taught uncritically in schools? Sure it is. Here are two more data points:
1) My power flying instructor has two sons in a private primary school here in Toowoomba. He asked me one day about the AGW thing as his kids were coming home from school worried about it. I gave him a 5 minute summary and he was happy to go home and tell them not to worry.
2) Nearly 3 years ago I went to a niece’s wedding. The father of the groom was at our table afterwards and he turned out to be a senior physics teacher in the Western Australian High School system. He was dyed in the wool disciple of James Hansen. Sites like CA are just discredited denier rubbish according to him.
I asked him to send me a couple of examples of the final year physics exam papers which he did. They were about as fluffy as the one ralph linked to. Nothing like what I did in 1965 in the same school system.
” ralph (03:27:21) :
….This is a physics exam for UK 16-year olds. From pure physics, this exam has been downgraded to general knowledge questions…”
I’ve looked at the test which you linked to (http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-PHY1AP-W-QP-MAR08.PDF), and I’m shaking my head in disbelief. Yes, it’s blatant propaganda and for the most part common knowledge, but it’s worse than you think.
Several multiple choice sections have 4 choices to be used 1 each for 4 questions, so this really is matching, not multiple choice. To use an equal number of choices and questions for matching, especially for only 4 questions, is a form of pedagogical malpractice.
Being certain of at least one answer greatly increases a student’s chances of getting remaining questions in that section correct. But, by getting one wrong, the student is “forced” to get at least two wrong.
WAR IS PEACE, SLAVERY IS FREEDOM, and WARMER IS COLDER
D. King (12:07:54) :
kadaka (11:46:17) :
Tell any Haitian about how bio-fuels are good for the planet.
While I will presume it was a good informative video, unfortunately it seems non-compatible with my dial-up connection. However I was already aware of the massive deforestation of Haiti, which has left it much worse off than the Dominican Republic, with whom it shares the island. The trees were used to make charcoal, the predominant local heat source. Without trees, and without money to get fuel elsewhere, some form of bio-fuel production naturally seemed inevitable. For which they will need open space, thus they will still be lacking the type of forest growth that helps the Dominican Republic during hurricanes and similar high wind events.
Strange that you don’t hear of green and/or relief groups proposing large solar energy projects for Haiti, given all the sunlight and the open space…
Hi ho Hadley: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4375035/Snow-storms-could-hit-Britain-next-week.html
I remember a comment made by somebody who was in Britain in the early 40s that this was a frequent weather pattern at the time.
Yeah sure Big Ears of the House of Hanover. Its going to be the warmest year ever, right on bozo.
So how do those temp records compare to last years? Anyone have info? Here in Spokane, WA we were getting 6′ of global warming about this time last year, though the rest of the year was fairly “normal.” Overall an all time record was set.
This year we’re dry and there’s nothing interesting in the forecast. And I’ll take this year’s weather over last, anytime.
Pamela Gray (10:14:16) :
“I have been following the crazy jet stream and its confluence with the change in the Arctic Oscillation…”
Maybe that explains the above?
Ric Werme (07:52:11) :
http://home.comcast.net/~ewerme/wuwt/
Awesome job. Thanks.
I wonder how much our autumn/winter has been the results of a fight between a negative Artic Oscillation and El Nino? Will the AO index continue its fall from earlier in the decade? If one goes back to 1976, there was a significant change in ENSO (towards El Nino) and a very large drop in the AO index. The winter of 77-78 was a very cold snowy one for the NH.
Once again, it is more useful to discuss research and relevant data than political opinion. So I offer the following:
http://www.atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca/SPARC/News14/14_Baldwin.html
In what way does this article on the Arctic Oscillation help explain the record snowfall?
Question:
Is there a source to show the records set per week or month over time? I want to understand how unusual this number of new records is.
Just returned from wildfowling in the north of Scotland and although I didn’t quite reach the northern extremity I travelled back to the Solway on the English border through fields heavily covered in snow and with difficult driving conditions for most of the journey. It seems to me that the whole country is blanketed in snow. These conditions have prevailed for over a week with temperatures down to -16C in places at times and they are forecast to continue for several days yet.
But it’s just weather…………extreme weather……………….again?
I hope this whimsical observation touches no raw nerves, and that Pamela, whose erudite thoughtful contributions I have enjoyed immensely this year, doesn’t get tetchy with me and ask for empirical evidence to back it up!
Pamela,
As an admirer of your contributions here, and I understand your position as a teacher, I have to ask, are you saying you have no knowledge of widespread classroom AGW peddling?
IMO that would be remarkable given that it is so widespread.
As widespread as our newspaper and most goverment agencies advocacy of AGW has been.
I lost track of how many times I was told of lessons and/or shown curriculum material. It isn’t a secret. Far from it.
It sounds like your own school system is doing a good job, however, so a hat tip for that.
From Boston, my 2 cents.
Today, it was 55 Deg. and raining. Melted the foot of snow we got a week ago.
From what I hear, there’s an El Nino coming down the pike. My understanding is it’ll warm up the world but drop a bucket load of snow on the Northeast. Oh, well.
The AGW’ers will crow about the temperature increase. But I would use Lubos Motl’s analysis (on another WUWT thread) to counter that that means we’re back on track on the global warming trend. But I don’t think we’ll know that for about a year from now. In the interim, let Climategate rule on the basic data!
About the AO index NOAA’s stating the AO index is to stay largely below -3.
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao_index_ensm.shtml
The NAO is also slated to go through a 2nd drop before even having the chance to hit positive values
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/nao.shtml
Could this mean, combined with ENSO, more mega snow storms for the Northern Hemisphere?
Recent lows in the daily SOI gave the ENSO SST’s a kick upwards, but like any good rollercoaster it’s on its way up again for about the 3rd time, this Nino being a Modoki
http://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/SeasonalClimateOutlook/SouthernOscillationIndex/30DaySOIValues/
You can take the teacher out of the school for the holidays, but you can’t take “school” out of the teacher for the holidays. I’ll stand by my remark. If you want to debate the larger issue of whether or not AGW hype is a teacher’s fault, you had better be ready to back it up as studied fact, not anecdotal opinion.
Anecdotal observations are one thing, conclusions are another. Not even Evil Knievel could jump the chasm necessary to go directly from one to the other, from teachers to AGW blame.
Pamela Gray says:December 27, 2009 at 9:31 am
If (for argument sake)) many cold weather events do not make a cooling climate then in a similar logic it appears you would agree that any parent/teacher individual experiences about AGW indoctrination do not make any case that there is a general agenda by AGW leaders in education?
I am ineterested in how one goes from many specifics to a more general statement.
John
Roger (13:58:10) :
The simplicity of it being much the same way the year before lays fresh on the memory. Before too long, it will sweep away the layers of brainwashing as the cold reality sets in.
Just like it did the last time, what was it, in the late 40’s?
The 6 part “The Cloud Mystery” starting at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKoUwttE0BA&feature=related is good.
JerryM (14:15:54) :
According to Piers Corbyn, we have only to wait 24 to 48 hours for an answer as to what lies ahead.
Eventually, Earth’s orbit takes us to NH summer where warming is to be found, but I doubt that is comfort to AGW which would have us wiping the sweat from our foreheads in the dead of winter.
A little humor from The Onion
“Despite its negligible impact on the population at large, the sudden dearth of experts is expected to be devastating for the American media, particularly TV newsmagazines, which have come to heavily rely on experts for their incisive, time-filling punditry.”
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/nations_experts_give_up?utm_source=onion_rss_daily
” photon without a Higgs (12:37:53) :
Slioch (10:29:59) :
There’s always a small number of cold and warm records broken like the ones you point out in your comment. What is noteworthy is the large number of snowfall records. These were not predicted to happen in global warming.”
The snowfall events may be noteworthy of themselves, but they are not necessarily indicative of cooler conditions. In this particular case, in the USA for this week, there are actually more warm records than cool records. This is consistent with the expectation that a generally warmer atmosphere contains more moisture and will therefore produce more precipitation. In winter that commonly falls as snow.
Where you are being misled is by the unstated impression that snow indicates colder conditions: it does not.
“MrPete (13:54:16) :
Question:
Is there a source to show the records set per week or month over time? I want to understand how unusual this number of new records is.”
see: http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/7day/us.html?c=maxtemp,mintemp,lowmax,highmin&s=20090211&e=20090211
and put in the date and period. As far as I can see, the longest period available is one week. So you would have to gather the data one week at a time. I have looked in occasionally and do not recall a week without many record events. Warm records generally exceed cold records, as has occurred this last week.
In thinking about all the wonderful, white snow most people are having I started thinking about AGW scientists and there supposed ability to say what the weather is going to be like 50 or 100 years from now but not able to say what it will be like in 5-10 yrs.
Scientists claiming they can predict with 90+% certainty what the climate will be 50 or 100 years from now but really have no way of predicting what it will be 5 or ten years from now defies logic.
For arguments sake, lets assume what they claim is true. That would mean if they take all their data up to the year 1965 (no data after 1965 can be used because for the purposes of this calculation it “doesn’t exist yet”) and run it thru their models they should easily be able to predict with better than 90% probability what the weather will be like in 2010.
Or expressed another way, they claim they can now predict what the weather will be like in 2060 based on what they know now, but by the time 2055 rolls around, they will now have no clue what 2060 will be like.
Bottom line, if your model is no good for 5 years from now, its worthless for 50 years from now too.
Garacka (12:22:31) :
P Gosselin (11:33:22) :
I was going to suggest putting the UEA CRU whistle blower at the top of the list as that event was a singular tipping point, but there would likely have been another event in the future if this one didn’t happen, and it was McIntyre’s tireless and brilliant due diligence that “allowed” many of these e-mails to have to have been written, so, I agree with McIntyre being #1. Regarding #2, I would suggest it is Anthony and Company, and the whistle blower is 3rd.
I would have thought that the inventor of the internet would have gotten a mention for providing the technology to enable all the dissent from the dominant AGW paradigm – wouldn’t that be – as self proclaimed – Mr Al Gore.
Hey Midwesterners and East Coasters,
We in the Golden State will gladly take your excess precipitation off your hands. Just send it our way and we can make good use of it.
@george E. Smith (12:59:51)
“So how about it ABC/channel 4; where did you come up with that insane story.”
Most likely they got it from here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091223133337.htm
EDITORIAL: Biased reporting on ClimategateRate this story
Associated Press coverage raises eyebrows
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/28/biased-reporting-on-climategate/
@Pamela Gray
When there are anomalous high temps in the Arctic, that is the time to look for dropping temps in the NH.
r (08:12:32) :
Forget the main stream media. The real roots of this movement, strangely enough, are in grade school and collage teachers.
You’re spot on and don’t let anyone, anyone, tell you that your wrong!
This AGW alarmism is now firmly entrenched in the UK ‘education’ system. From what I’ve read from others it’s not just the UK system either!
You’re worried about your kids being force-fed propoganda and that is precisely how you should be feeling.
Don’t worry about being lectured about how wrong you are by quoting your subjective experiences as being part of the general situation. Your kids education is at stake here. Your determination to get something done is admirable!
Keep fighting.
For all the talk about this El Nino ushering in a record 2010 temperature year, keep an eye on the SOI. It isn’t even close to 1997-1998 or even 2003 at this point. I just don’t see the numbers adding up.
The effects El Nino has on global temps appear to be directly tied to SOI, with the timing (start) and persistence of SOI being the lagging indicator of temperature.
The 30/90 day SOI average is currently at -10.82/-11.02 respectively, and may be waning. This is nowhere in the vicinity of a precursor for scorching temps in 2010 IMO. Unless SOI makes another turn back into negative territory, deepens and persists there, my suspicion is El Nino is getting way too much attention and just might end up being a 2007 redux with 2010 year end moving strongly into La Nina territory.
Watch SOI!
While it has been a while since I’ve been in the classroom (either as an instructor or student), last year my daughter was going to the University of Utah on a full-ride chemistry scholarship. She lamented to me about one of her chemistry teachers that was completely in love with Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”. This same teacher was shocked when she discovered that out of all the class, the majority had not seen it. Yet she was completely in synch with the concepts. So much for indpendent thought by that professor.
I’m not saying teachers are easily brainwashed–I’m not in the position to do that study. However, the gospel of AGW is alive and well in our education system, where it should never appear at all!
Can you imagine how stupid these people are going to look 20 years from now when all the industrial nations have taken up cap-and-trade and destroyed their economies while the Chinese, Brazilians and Indians have become the economic leaders of the world? Hey, China’s agriculture output has increased 25% in the last two decades because of additional CO2–why on earth would they want to reverse that benefit? And their per-capita income has increased way more than that since their electrical grid has expanded–in a way it’s a win-win scenario: Their coal-fired electrical plants indirectly feed their rice-generating plants.
I say let’s do a science experiment–let’s all jump on the AGW bandwagon and give it 100% for the next two decades. What? No takers? You’re not willing to live like your ancestors did circa 1880? You don’t want to drive a buggy and plow your fields with a horse? Burning kersoene lamps in the evenings isn’t a winning idea? Sounds like a lot of fun to me…
Ok. I’ll just file that last paragraph under “abject ridicule”.
Excuse me, am i insane or is the BBC insane?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ethicalman/2009/12/are_our_children_the_real_climate_criminals.html
King of Cool (12:58:58) : You wrote: “ What I cannot understand is why this is not reflected in Arctic Ice Extent?”
I looked at the ice extent graph Anthony links to along the upper right side (AMSR-E) and saw nothing out of line.
Ice on the Arctic Ocean has been discussed numerous times on WUWT. It is a complex subject but several things come to mind. When the ocean surface freezes it is first thin and can be broken up and moved by winds and currents. Or if the current is warm some might melt. It can pile up and become ridged and thick – unlikely to melt during the next summer unless it is flushed out of the Arctic bowl into lower latitude. But when it piles up there is less extent. Then more ocean surface shows, and now exposed to the cold gives off more energy than when it is covered by a few inches of ice. There is no sun input now so there is no energy input from above. Bottom line is that one should not expect a smooth upward curve in ice extent unless wind and currents cease.
Oh, one ought not take Nsidc’s word, or image in this case, as gospel.
Slabadang (13:00:22) :
>Finlands TV is a runner up on your list.
The Video is concise, on the spot and quite enlightening. Emjoyed very much.
Could you please tell me the on-air date, if you know it. Thanks.
Pamela>> Sorry to say, but also in Sweden our kids are being tought to embrace the AGW theory uncritically. In fact, my son was told by a teacher:
“I don’t question this and I don’t think you should either.”
This is a very real problem.
But please tell us how this is handled in your school. Sounds interresting.
That is because there is a major low pressure system West of you that is pulling warm air up from the South as the wind circulates counter-clockwise around it.
If you look at the jet stream you will notice that it is a Southerly flow over MA. When that storm to your West passes, it will become a more Northerly flow and it will get cold.
Patrick Davis said: 22c here in Sydney, Australia today. Pretty cool for summer, but at ~90% humidity it’s very sticky.
NEWFLASH: It’s always humid in Sydney. The worst climate in the country outside of Townsville.
The ignorance of most of you is frightening. Anyone with half a brain knows that with the warming of the earth due to man-made pollution, extreme weather, both hot and cold, will come.
Not to mention, it’s not NEARLY as cold in many areas as it once was. We haven’t been below zero in Tulsa, OK, in over a decade, when we used to be on an annual basis. [snip]
Patrik (16:51:12) :
Pamela>> Sorry to say, but also in Sweden our kids are being tought to embrace the AGW theory uncritically. In fact, my son was told by a teacher:
“I don’t question this and I don’t think you should either.”
This is a very real problem.
But please tell us how this is handled in your school. Sounds interresting.
Patrik, you’ve hit the nub of the problem. Pamela, for the first time on this blog AFAIR, was wrong-footed.
In the EU, Bad Science is now a given and Child Abuse is now normal.
Time for lies to be revealed, is it not?
John Boston (17:08:47) :
The ignorance of most of you is frightening. Anyone with half a brain knows that with the warming of the earth due to man-made pollution, extreme weather, both hot and cold, will come.
Not to mention, it’s not NEARLY as cold in many areas as it once was. We haven’t been below zero in Tulsa, OK, in over a decade, when we used to be on an annual basis. [snip]
Just keep coming back here mate.
It’ll take a while, judging by my experiences, but it will happen!
Sometimes the ones you trusted most, just lied. Dunno their motives but it, sure as diddly, fooled me too!
John Boston:
I hope you were being sarcastic because expecting “extreme cold” to come from a warming of the globe is rather nonsensical.
Where does the cold air for the extreme cold come from? Does it come from the poles? If so, how can the air be colder now when the poles should show the most warming of all? If anything, greenhouse warming should see a moderation of Winter cold temperatures. I would expect to see little or no change in Summer temperatures and a significant warming of Winter temperatures. We aren’t seeing that.
DirkH (16:25:28) :
Excuse me, am i insane or is the BBC insane?
“Is the BBC insane?” is a rhetorical question.
Reading the piece all the way through, it’s not that bad.
Perhaps it would be beneficial for parents to convince their kids they must do their part to fight global warming by dramatically reducing their energy usage, per the end of that piece. Such as no iPods, cell phones, no TV unless it’s parentally-authorized (news and documentaries), no video games, no computer use unless it’s for school use and that will be monitored. You could even get a manual reel lawnmower and have them mow the lawn with it. Now a washboard and tub for their laundry may be overdoing it, but you can certainly get them to hang stuff on a clothesline.
Yes, this is stuff they must do, getting the parents to use funny lightbulbs and separate the trash is not good enough. This is about their sacrifices, not their parents.
Then after they get so fed up they shout about how they cannot possibly see how any of it matters or even makes sense, well then, let the de-programming begin.
Pamela Gray (13:50:00) :
The negative Atlantic oscillation can help explain the snowfall, but there are other pieces to the puzzle. From the current NWS extended discussion (http://www.crh.noaa.gov/product.php?site=NWS&product=PMD&issuedby=EPD) they state:
THE KEY TO TO THE OVERALL LONGWAVE PATTERN IS THE REDEVELOPMENT OF
VERY STRONG BLOCKING OVER SRN GREENLAND BY THU THAT DRIFTS SLOWLY
WWD INTO THE SRN DAVIS STRAIT NEXT WEEKEND. THIS STRONG HIGH
LATITUDE BLOCK FAVORS SUPPRESSED WESTERLIES ACROSS THE LOWER 48
STATES WELL INTO THE ATLANTIC. THESE SUPPRESSED
WESTERLIES..JOINING FORCES WITH A SUBTROPICAL STREAM NEAR THE
US/MEXICAN BORDER AND THE MODERATE EL NINO…FAVOR AN ACTIVE STORM
TRACK ACROSS THE GULF OF MEXICO TOWARDS THE S ATLANTIC COAST.
In other words, the NAO is conducive to southern stream storms but only because the pacific El Nino creates a more active southern stream jet, Also if you examine the NAO index chart (http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/pna/nao_index_ensm.shtml) you can see, roughly, a negative AO in October and December and positive in September and November. It is no coincidence that the continental US was warm in Sept and Nov and cold (and snowy) in Oct and Dec.
Again I stress that the negative AO is just an indicator that essentially says “hey U.S., look to the north and/or south for near-term weather rather than predominately zonal west to east.” It does not mean more or less snow, or even more cold air although cold is a pretty good bet most times AO is negative. Under the current El Nino and other Pacific conditions, it means decent shots of arctic air (although not excessive) along with decent pacific storms reforming somewhere over the mid-U.S. and moving north into the midwest or up the east coast.
For those that say weather is not climate, consider that when it gets cold here from the negative AO and other factors, it does not get equally warm somewhere else to balance it out. It will probably get somewhat warmer somewhere else, but not warm enough to balance out the cold.
John Boston (17:08:47) :
The ignorance of most of you is frightening. Anyone with half a brain knows that with the warming of the earth due to man-made pollution, extreme weather, both hot and cold, will come.
Not to mention, it’s not NEARLY as cold in many areas as it once was. We haven’t been below zero in Tulsa, OK, in over a decade, when we used to be on an annual basis. [snip]
======================================
everything about your argument made sense, except the part after you said “the”.
This may have been posted, but there is no doubt that this is by FAR FAR the most serious and referenced presentation of the whole “climate change” saga by anyone/organization. Would not be surprised if the major networks will use it in the coming months.
http://hro001.wordpress.com/2009/12/27/climate-science-finnished/ there are parts 1, 2 and 3
With all the snow lying around at the moment, It makes one wonder what would happen if the worlds temperature take a a downward dive.
John Boston (17:08:47) :
My suggestion is to read the Arctic Oscillation paper linked above. Some of our weather may be explained by the theory that AGW causes a cooler stratosphere. OTOH, there are also natural factors causing the stratosphere to cool. I suspect that it is not ignorance that causes most posters here to implicate natural cooling, but a broader and deeper understanding of weather and climate.
I believe that manmade CO2 has a slight warming effect over many decades, but not much more than that. I do not believe it is responsible for more severe weather, but it can cause less severe weather by my current understanding. For climate and weather I mainly look at PDO and AO. I humbly suggest you should do the same.
Slioch (15:02:15) :
You also didn’t check the locations where those few record warms happened. You make it sound as if the occurred in the same locations and on the same days as the record snow. This did not happen.
You also overlooked where I said there are always a small number of cold and warm records broken. The small number of warm records you are talking about is just part of normal weather. They are not global warming. The sky isn’t falling.
However, there were 304 low temperature, and 403 lowest max temperature records were set for the week Dec 6–14. That is noteworthy.
Temperatures across most of the continental US are below average now. You wish to believe that it doesn’t have to be colder for snowfall records to be set that’s up to you. The rest of us will stay in the real world.
The earth is supposed to be warming now if ‘global warming’ is real. And record snow was not predicted in ‘global warming’ scenarios.
Global warming is not happening.
david m (17:42:26) :
With all the snow lying around at the moment, It makes one wonder what would happen if the worlds temperature take a a downward dive.
=======================================
i’ve read, it’s not how cold the winter is, but how cool the summers are. north america just came out of a cool summer right?
Slioch (15:14:25) :
I have looked in occasionally and do not recall a week without many record events. Warm records generally exceed cold records, as has occurred this last week.
Your occasional looks must be only when the few number of record warm has been greater then the record cold.
You must be thorough and complete before talking like you know what is really happening. Half measures don’t count in science. Half measure can be cherry picking. Cherry picking is what the ClimateGate scientists did and most likely are still doing.
I’m tired of this sophistry game your ilk plays.
Science 22 September 2000: Vol. 289. no. 5487, pp. 2068 – 2074 DOI: 10.1126/science.289.5487.2068
Climate Extremes: Observations, Modeling, and Impacts
David R. Easterling,1* Gerald A. Meehl,2 Camille Parmesan,3 Stanley A. Changnon,4 Thomas R. Karl,1 Linda O. Mearns2
They found that for complex event-driven climate extremes such as more wet spells (increased precipitation at mid- and high latitudes in winter[e.g. record snowfalls]) change is “likely”;physically plausible and could be shown for a larger group of models. These observations are confirmation of the model predictions made 9 years ago.
I blame Al Gore – and his “Global Warming”. It has been much cooler and wetter the entire year in my little corner of the world – so this information really doesn’t surprise me. I think we haven’t seen the worse of it yet – as we get into February and March, it will be really interesting to see what the weather is like then!!
crosspatch (17:29:12) :
He is also overlooking the cooling since 2004.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_4ruQ7t4zrFA/Sy0GNXuxT1I/AAAAAAAADqY/90Z472zMWPg/uah-temperatures-1995-2009.JPG
And the cooling since 1998.
And the cooling since the Medieval Warm Period.
And the cooling since the Roman Warm Period.
etc, etc, etc
Do you really want a lecture from me on self-reporting opinion survey research and how to do it right? Come on folks, anecdotal comments and beliefs absolutely will, seductively so, give you the wrong impression and lead you to the following:
Survey taken re: adultery in a closed room of 100 adults
90% of respondents in the room report not having indulged.
90% of the same respondents believe others in the room have.
I see these record blizzards have brought the trolls out. Who are they trying to convince, us, or themselves?
Maybe they’re just whistling past the cemetery.
kadaka …
Oohh. I love your thinking. ☺ Well done.
And maybe their eco-weenie teachers could give up their classroom smart boards and go back to blackboards. No more rides from parents to school less than 2 km … all kids must now walk to school of it is less than 2 km. Let’s see what else. No more Slurpees. Obviously we have to put an end to Coke and Pepsi in their lives. And don’t even think about toys..especially those bears you build yourself. Barbies no more. And the summer cottage that takes two tanks of gasoline to get to. Poof.
Obviously not about to happen, but the thinking is good kadaka.
“Hey kids what are YOU willing to give up?”
It is not always some other ba$tard is it. ☺
It makes one wonder what would happen if the worlds temperature take a a downward dive.
It isn’t really the snow laying around at low altitudes. One thing I have noticed is the complete lack of recent information (as in the past 3 years or so) of the state of glaciers in the NH. What have glaciers been doing in the Alps and the Rockies the past few years?
It seems like most of the information I can find is pre 2002.
There is this article from this site in 2008. I notice absolutely nothing from Glacier National Park recently.
There seems to be comments here that there is something going on with Arctic ice. The only thing I see happening is growth.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php
DMI is interesting because they plot 30% ice extent which is different from everyone else who plots 15% extent. That is, everyone else plots the extent to which the ocean is covered with at least 15% ice while DMI lots the extent to which there is at least 30% coverage.
So there is a larger area of more consolidated ice this year but less area of scattered ice. Not sure what it all means in the “big picture” though.
Brian Dodge (17:57:33) :
Your study says winter. It didn’t say record blizzards would happen in late fall.
You didn’t supply a link so I couldn’t go to it to point out its other flaws.
Wonderful reporting on records broken or tied, Anthony. To P Gosselin (05:03:39) thanks for the WUWT HIGHLIGHTS. They are as amazing as the snowfall records. The international readership will appreciate this excellent summary.
To Pamela Gray and others: Both the evidence for AGW brainwashing in our schools (international) and our individual experiences that our children and grandchildren being taught lies instead of real subjects are extremely important. All of us should (must) protest (with evidence) to the teachers, principals, and the board of education with respectful anger. I hope someone’s blog will be focused on this MAJOR problem. Teaching children and adolescents is a sacred responsibility; lies are not ever acceptable. Teachers who lie should be placed on probation, subject to dismissal. To those teachers and school districts that take their responsibilities seriously we should give great praise and support.
Pamela:
“Come on folks, anecdotal comments and beliefs absolutely will, seductively so, give you the wrong impression”
No Pamela
I have three kids in school and they are all being taught that man made global warming is real and to not question it. They have even had ‘special’ assignments and ‘special’ homework on it.
I, however, played on their weakness. I know kids love a good conspiracy, so I gave them one.
Problem is, kids need to look up to and revere their teachers to a certain extent. Telling them that their teachers are wrong can backfire.
It can equate to telling them that they are wasting their time learning.
crosspatch (18:28:46) :
I notice absolutely nothing from Glacier National Park recently.
Will this do anything for you?
“THE BLACKFEET INDIANS PREDICT THE RETURN OF ‘MANY GLACIERS’ TO GLACIER PARK”
http://www.longrangeweather.com/ArticleArchives/BlackfeetIndians.htm
photon without a Higgs (18:53:50) :
crosspatch (18:28:46) :
I notice absolutely nothing from Glacier National Park recently.
Will this do anything for you?
“THE BLACKFEET INDIANS PREDICT THE RETURN OF ‘MANY GLACIERS’ TO GLACIER PARK”
http://www.longrangeweather.com/ArticleArchives/BlackfeetIndians.htm
=====================================
yes, we’re all on the same page, but lets not expect too much, after all they are GLACIERS 🙂
Bob Shapiro (13:18:50) :
” ralph (03:27:21) :
….This is a physics exam for UK 16-year olds. From pure physics, this exam has been downgraded to general knowledge questions…”
I’ve looked at the test which you linked to (http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-PHY1AP-W-QP-MAR08.PDF), and I’m shaking my head in disbelief. Yes, it’s blatant propaganda and for the most part common knowledge, but it’s worse than you think.
OMG question three said it all….
QUESTION THREE
Generating electricity causes problems for the environment.
Match words, A, B, C and D, with the numbers 1–4 in the sentences.
A acid rain
B global warming
C noise pollution
D radioactive waste
Nuclear power stations produce . . . 1 . . . .
Wind farms produce . . . 2 . . . .
Coal-fired power stations produce sulfur dioxide which causes . . . 3 . . . .
All fossil-fuel power stations produce carbon dioxide which causes . . . 4 . . . .
Here is a quantitative challenge for everyone.
Check your local heating degree days reported in your heating bills or via the local weather service. Here in Colorado the HDD (heating degree days) are up over normal heating season to date, and the CDD (cooling degree days were also down for the previous air conditioning season).
HDD since July 1 2009 = TOTAL = 2514
DPTR FM NORMAL +208
CDD since JAN 1 2009 = 533
DPTR FM NORMAL -163
That clearly shows in that in the reporting region covered by the DEN weather office, we had a cooler than normal summer and a cooler than normal fall, and winter to date.
Is there any region in the U.S. that is not seeing a similar pattern except isolated areas in the south?
It would be interesting to plot a map of HDD anomalies for the continental U.S. and a CDD anomalies for this season like those color coded maps we always see showing monthly temperature anomalies.
Perhaps one of our programmer wizards could knock together a script to scrub the data from National Weather Service products to put up another widget that monitors national HDD and CDD anomalies over average.
Larry
The insidious thing about this is, if you answer the other three questions correctly, you must answer the forth one correctly because it is the only answer left… even if you know it is wrong!
John Boston (17:08:47) :
The ignorance of most of you is frightening. Anyone with half a brain knows that with the warming of the earth due to man-made pollution, extreme weather, both hot and cold, will come.
Not to mention, it’s not NEARLY as cold in many areas as it once was. We haven’t been below zero in Tulsa, OK, in over a decade, when we used to be on an annual basis.
So true. Glaciers are melting and not just dinky glaciers. Continent wide glaciers are gone. Historically glaciers are at record lows. They once covered a significant part of North America to well South of Chicago. And I do blame global warming for that.
@ photon without a Higgs (18:41:32)
Winter officially started December 21.
If you plug the title of the Science article “Climate Extremes: Observations, Modeling, and Impacts” into google scholar , it will get you to
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sci;289/5487/2068
It’s been cited 698 times – good luck with “…point(ing) out its other flaws.”
M. Simon
But the tree rings of Briffa tell me that there is global cooling(tm). Maybe the glaciers sublimated in the cool breeze.
How is it that the catastrophic climate events of the warming type are to be seen in the weather and the cooling events in the weather are just weather?
How come the glaciers are at a historical low but the Maldives are still afloat? Where did all the water go?
Brian Dodge (20:11:54) :
December 6–14, 815 new snowfall records, 100’s of cold records
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/13/lots-of-new-cold-and-snow-records-in-the-usa-this-week/
Brian Dodge (20:11:54) :
——————————-
Are you this Brian Dodge of GreenPeace?
http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/contentStreamer?objectId=0900006480820f2a&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
Hey Brian (20:11:54) ,
Thanks for the link, but why is the article dated 22Sept2000, and the cites at the end are dated up to 2009. Is this a living review? Maybe that’s how it’s done, I dunno.
Brian Dodge (20:11:54) :
I found another flaw
such as increases in extreme high temperatures, decreases in extreme low temperatures,
These aren’t happening.
Brian Dodge (20:11:54) :
Here’s another
which include extremes such as a very low or very high daily temperature, or heavy daily or monthly rainfall amount, that occur every year
These things aren’t happening every year. There’s has been no unusual pattern in weather. There has only been a decrease in extreme weather events.
So I’m done looking for flaws now. I found 2 more in less than 3 minutes. I have more interesting things to do.
@John Boston
Pollution is bad, by definition. Next the important thing is being able to identify what is and isn’t pollution. Cars are noisy and dirty, albeit less so than horses. But is CO2 dirt? Plants use it. Plants also use compost. It’s like, are germs bad? It seems we have been “too clean” and our immune systems need some germs around to be healthy. It is like, are forest fires bad? Is it good to take anti-biotics? Is stealing always wrong? Can you free yourself from mechanistic thinking?
@ photon without a Higgs
“Here is the daily count data from NCDC, with links to tabular reports and source for the snowfall records:
Dec 20th 124
Dec 21st 50
Dec 22nd 75
Dec 23rd 71
Dec 24th 170
Dec 25th 235
Dec 26th 152
Total 877”
Do you think that because winter weather started a little early this year, the GCM climatology predictions are invalidated?
The letter’s from me, but I’m not a webmaster or anything else for Greenpeace – I don’t know where the “webmaster@greenpeace.org” came from.
@Sparky
the papers at the bottom are ones that cite Easterling et. al. Their 132 references are the ones numbered in the section above.
@ photon without a Higgs (22:14:17) :
“These things aren’t happening every year. There’s has been no unusual pattern in weather. There has only been a decrease in extreme weather events.”
http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/custom/us.html?c=maxtemp,mintemp,lowmax,highmin&s=20090123
There were about 400 new record highs in January 2009. I downloaded the data from hamweather.com which has the date and value of the previous record, and generated a scatterplot using Appleworks – see http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/jan2009recordhighs-l1rqZ.jpg. You will note that the previous high temps cluster around more recent dates; the mean interval to the previous high record is only ~27 years, instead of the expected ~50 years if the dates were randomly distributed.
photon without a Higgs (11:36:58) :
oldgifford (06:53:35) :
Met Office Press Release 25 February 2009
Trend? The trend of the last three years is that winters are getting worse.
Does he want a larger data set than three years? Let’s go back to the Medieval Warm Period of 1000 years ago. Winters of the last 150 years are worse than then.
What trend is he talking about?
I guess the trend that they keep on about that we are all doomed as temperatures are going to continually increase.
See http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/
I notice a lot of bickering over weather events here. It is a bit of nonsense to take a week or two of bad winter weather and parade it as proof of climate change.
But it these events repeat every year (last winter was also a doozy), then it won’t be long before these single events start to mean something. There are even warmists – Mojib Latif to name one – who are predicting colder climate for the next 10+ years, and admit the climate models were woefully inadequate.
I think it’s just a matter of a few years before the warmist scientists admit their models were wrong and that they completely overstated the role of CO2.
The Climategate e-mails already prove this. The warmists have become deparate.
2009 is the year the AGW hypothesis crumbled to a heap of rubble.
Slabadang, 13:00:22
Thanks for this link. I was not aware of this excellent Finnish documentary.
Why wasn’t it posted anywhere?
IT’S A MUST SEE!
Of course, nothing about this on the BBC – Broadcaster of Lies. I hope people in the UK remember who has been telling us lies and lies about the climate the next time they have to pay the licience fee.
Lot’s of snow. Hmm, let’s see. Snow is precipitation. Precipitation usually occurs when a cold front clashes with a warm front laden with moisture.
Excuse me for my obvious towering ignorance but I really don’t see what a record amount of precip has to do with a long term temperature trend.
There’s a low level reasoning going on here based on an “aberrant” event.
Wayne S, you are ignoring record breaking LOW temperatures that go with it then?
Brian Dodge (23:10:44) :
Are you a member of GreenPeace?
A C Osborn (06:59:41) :
Sure they are ignoring record breaking cold. They are also ignoring the cooling trend in the earth.
They will continue to insist global warming is happening. And they continue to point people to this lone study that full of trepidation. Its predictions are not occurring. The opposite of what it predicts is occurring. Global warming is not happening.
oldgifford (01:44:26) :
I know.
These trends are all predicted trends. They are not the real trends happening in the world. In the real world we can all see cooling happening.
Brian Dodge (23:10:44) :
I could see the numbers before.
The paper you point out is making predictions about snow from global warming. But warming is not happening. So your paper is invalidated by observation. All of its predictions are meaningless.
You can’t cherry pick one part of the paper and ignore its context and then conclude the paper is valid even though in correct context it isn’t. Science doesn’t work that way.
But politics does work that way.
Wayne S (05:35:55)
Correct.
And as I also pointed out, the information provided was partial and insignificant.
This is how to mislead people:
Cherry pick one week of interesting weather in one small part of the world. Cherry pick the data about that one insignificant event so that you can provided a catchy headline about “new snowfall records” and forget to mention the preponderance of warm records for the same period. (which latter is similarly insignificant, of course).
Then just sit back and watch as people draw the wrong conclusion: that this event is somehow evidence that global warming isn’t happening. It is, of course, nothing of the kind.
Thus is another piece in the jigsaw puzzle of denial and deception slotted into place. People are so eager not to believe in AGW that misleading them is as easy as falling off a log.
photon
You keep saying statements like, “warming is not happening” and “They are also ignoring the cooling trend in the earth. ”
What time period are you referring to? One month? Six months? A year? Five years? a decade?, two?, three?
What area are you referring to? Your backyard? The US? The northern hemisphere? The whole Earth’s surface?
When you have answered those questions provide data to back-up your assertion, or withdraw it.
Slioch, no one is saying an isolated weather event is proof of anything. The current North American/european weather is interesting because 1) it once again deviates substantially from what was predicted from official sources. The warmist bias in official predictions is increasingly in evidence, to our sceptical amusement. Furthermore, 2) it’s not isolated. Since 2007, Northern winters appear to be getting colder and snowier than they were earlier this decade. While this undoubtedly is due to shifting weather patterns more than to any “global temperature” change, it’s consistent with the declining trend in global “average temperatures” in all 4 datasets in recent years (statistically significant from 2001 in the satellite data). It’s also contrary to warmist predictions fram years back that snow was a thing of the past in certain regions.
Here in Eastern Norway, it’s the coldest Christmas I can remember. Currently 10 C below, with even colder weather forecast. About 30 cm beautiful shining snow.
I hope I am not sounding obsessive about my travels yesterday through Scotland but it was noticeable that some counties had gritted and salted the main routes whilst others had not, and that efforts to maintain the flow of traffic were piecemeal and amateurish over much of the journey. Rumour in Dumfriesshire is that they have already run out of salt through inadequate provision and that many other areas are in the same boat.
Just as I set off before xmas I heard a spokeswoman for the English counties state that stockpiling salt was unnecessary in view of AGW and that they had other priorities on which to use scarce resources ( money ).
I passed many accidents in both directions and on arrival home met a nursing neighbour from A&E who had a busy xmas period with people who had fallen on untreated pavements (sidewalks).
The warmers are directly responsible for this state of affairs through promulgating their discredited theories to the credulous plodders that make up our local govt administration.
So I say to the trolls peddling their beliefs on this thread, this is not a cosy little ism to puff up your ego at dinner parties or the local sandal shop, it has disastrous consequences for real people in the real world when fools or knaves embrace it.
And to my UK compatriots I ask that they monitor and leave a comment when supplies of grit run out in their area!
slioch 08:08:56
That is really funny, it is EXACTLY what the MMCW has been doing for the last 20 years.
But when they do try, they have to falsify data to do so.
Pamela,
In your school did they show An Inconvient truth? And if they did, did they also show “The Global Warming Swindle”? Just curious how your school is handling it since you claim your school does not present AGW as fact. Because the school here in San Diego my kids went to also only got that AGW is real and reaching a crisis point. Thanks to a lot of discussions and interaction Ive had with my kids growing up, none of the 4 believe CO2 is a significant cause of any global warming that has been occuring.
@ photon without a Higgs
I’m not a member of Greenpeace. I’ve been a Lifetme Member of the Sierra Club since sometime in the ’70s; maybe that’s the cause of the trend in temperatures.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1970/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1970/trend/plot/pmod/offset:-1366.4/mean:6
Are you a Republican?
nope, I’m not a republican. I hate politics. This is why I hate what is going on in global warming—it is all about politics and power over people. Despite the fact that the earth stopped warming in 1998 there are still environmentalists and politicians that try to impose global warming with all of it’s harmful regulations and taxes on the world.
If 1998 isn’t a good enough date then start with 2005.
If that’s not good enough then start with 1000 A.D.
And if that isn’t good enough then start with 100 B.C.
There has been a cooling trend on earth from all of these times until now.
Manmade global warming is not happening—unless you want to talk about UHI—that manmade factor is happening. The past ten years are not the hottest decade in human history. Nothing unprecedented is happening in current climate. Everything that has happened in climate in the last 150 years has happened within normal variability.
The science of climate change is not settled. All factors of climate science are not beyond debate. There is clearly a scientific debate going on over factors involved in climate. The foremost factor of climate that is now being the debated the most is the sun.
Mans influence on weather exists but it is minuscule and irrelevant.
Co2 does not control climate. Co2 is not a pollutant.
Roger (09:44:35) :
I heard a spokeswoman for the English counties state that stockpiling salt was unnecessary in view of AGW….I passed many accidents in both directions and on arrival home met a nursing neighbour from A&E who had a busy xmas period with people who had fallen on untreated pavements (sidewalks).
The warmers are directly responsible for this state of affairs
I agree!
Odd thing is some of them in their self righteousness feel they are doing something good for the world.
A C Osborn (06:59:41)
What do the screaming headlines say? Something about snowfall records. And the charts that follow don’t say anything about temperature records. If they did, it would be the same thing: a “Proof by example” fallacy with some “Cherry picking” (please look it up if you are not familiar with the terms).
I am not arguing climate warming or cooling here. That will sort itself out over the next decade by the art of careful data gathering and interpretation, not by diatribe on a website like this.
What I am commenting on here is the heap of crap in the media that is that is “proof” of this or that. I get links in email that are supposed to convince me or change my mind. They invariably point to anecdotes or events that are at the ends of the bell curve. This is no way to be informed on a subject as important as this.
Thank you Slioch (07:59:12). My sentiments exactly.
Slioch (07:59:12) :
and forget to mention the preponderance of warm records for the same period
There was not a preponderance of warm records. To say there was is an exaggeration.
There were some, an amount that always happens in normal variability no matter what climate is doing.
There were almost as many cold records. You didn’t say there was a preponderance of cold records. Is it because you are cherry picking?
Wayne S (18:22:13) :
What do the screaming headlines say?
Headlines all over the media continue to say global warming is happening and we all have to be saved. And the same footage of the spring breakup of polar icecaps is run over and over with those headlines when they’re on tv.
But ClimateGate is making some headlines too. 🙂
I think this in-depth analysis by Dr. John P. Costella gives it a good run for its money. Also fully referenced.
Left the link out!
http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/
photon without a Higgs (18:56:07)
asked, “You didn’t say there was a preponderance of cold records. Is it because you are cherry picking?”
No. I said it for three reasons:
Because I know what the word ‘preponderance’ means.
Because there were more warm records than cold ones during the week in question.
Because I don’t lie.
I also stated that the fact was insignificant, as are the record snow events, as far as any relevance to global warming is concerned.
>>>Pamela Gray (18:20:21) :
>>>Do you really want a lecture from me on self-reporting opinion
>>>survey research and how to do it right?
Pamela, you are wrong on thıs one. AGW propaganda ın UK prımary schools ıs rıfe. Just look at the people ın the teachıng professıon, and you know what you are goıng to get. In my day, ınfant school was 100% male (many ex WWII mılıtary), now for my kıds ıt ıs 100% left-leanıng soppy female.
That ıs a huge change ın polıtıcal outlook.
The propaganda started wıth new nursary rhymes that I had never been taught. Lıke ‘Baa baa raınbow sheep…..’ !!! It has progressed to scare storıes about everyone drownıng ıf we take an aeroplane for holıday. (never mınd that we are 350′ up ın our town.)
AGW propaganda for chıldren ıs rıfe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMp8UiCNYas
.
It seems a number of people still refuse to believe that over the last few decades the Earth has been warming, and continues so to do. Here is the data from the NASA GISS temperatures series, which shows the global average temperatures anomalies (relative to 1951-1980) for the last fifty years. The data is taken from the December to November (D-N) column of:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
and averaged over five year periods. I have reported the results to three significant figures simply to aid anyone wishing to check the arithmetic – two sig. sigs. would otherwise be more appropriate. The NASA GISS series collates information from polar regions as well as the rest of the Earth’s surface, unlike the other series (HADCRUT3 and the two satellite series). Since the Arctic is warming rapidly this then contributes to the warming shown in the NASA GISS series.
1960-1964 -0.044C
1965-1969 -0.032C
1970-1974 +0.004C
1975-1979 -0.004C
1980-1984 +0.176C
1985-1989 +0.182C
1990-1994 +0.246C
1995-1999 +0.390C
2000-2004 +0.476C
2005-2009 +0.546C
As you can see, each five year period for the last few decades is warmer than the previous five year period, and that trend continues. Those who claim that “the Earth is on a cooling trend” or that “global warming stopped in 1998” or similar are simply deluding themselves by cherry picking data and fitting “trends” which have no statistical significance.
From past experience I know that such information will be met by protestations such as:
“You can’t trust NASA GISS because Hansen is a” (insert whichever insult takes your fancy)
“What about the Medieval Warm Period/Holocene optimum”
“It’s a rebound from the Little Ice Age” (I love that one. Makes the climate sound like a bouncy rubber ball).
“It’s been bl**dy cold/snowing like there’s no tomorrow/ raining cats and dogs for the last week where I live”
“It’s just a ruse to get more taxes from ME”
“It’s just too horrible. I refuse to believe it.”
… and I’ve probably forgotten a few.
But could I suggest that it is time to put away such childish things and start to face reality?
And that reality is that we are coming to the end of the period of relative climate stability that has allowed human civilisation to arise and flourish for the last ten thousand years. We are entering a time of climatic instability due to the incessant addition of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, to the atmosphere. That instability will likely cause global disruption of agriculture with consequent huge suffering and migration of populations into other areas that are already stressed, with attendant risks of conflict. It will likely cause massive disruption to ecosystems with consequent huge increases in the rates of extinctions. It will likely cause widespread flooding of coastal cities and agricultural land that will continue for centuries.
And in order to reduce the severity of those impacts we require to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and develop new cleaner technologies that will generate innovation and invention, new jobs and opportunities and produce cleaner, healthier environments and homes in which people can live and work and it will leave your children and their children a better planet on which to try to flourish. And we will need to do that just a few decades (at most) before we would need to do it anyway when fossil fuels start to run out. Sit down and ask yourself, isn’t that a better way to live?
So, please, stop running around thinking that “Climategate” makes all these challenges go away. It does not. I doubt whether in the long term it will even delay the necessary action. And , if it does, what kind of pyrrhic victory is that?
Slioch (04:46:19),
Yes, the Earth is emerging from the LIA, and from the last great Ice Age before that. Nature goes in cycles, and the planet has been warming naturally ever since; not, as you claim, only “for the last few decades.”
Imputing natural climate fluctuations with sinister acts of evil humans requires some real world proof of cause and effect, rather than the coincidental correllation that you attribute normal climate fluctuations to when you say:
Yes. You’ve certainly forgotten that the numbers have been massaged, enhanced, manipulated, run through a meat grinder, correlated, and ‘adjusted’. Maybe they’re real, maybe not. We just don’t know, without the original raw data and the methods used to adjust the numbers. And much of that information seems to be missing.
What we do know is that there is an enormous amount of money being paid out by governments, quangos, NGOs, leftist foundations and billionaires to promote the AGW conjecture. And that money does not go to those who point out that the climate is well within its normal historical parameters.
It sounds like wild-eyed raving when you proclaim: “We are entering a time of climatic instability due to the incessant addition of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, to the atmosphere. That instability will likely cause global disruption of agriculture with consequent huge suffering and migration of populations into other areas that are already stressed, with attendant risks of conflict. It will likely cause massive disruption to ecosystems with consequent…” & etc., etc.
Please provide even one solid piece of empirical evidence that CO2=”climate instability”. Just one. That’s all I ask. We wouldn’t want to think you’re a lunatic, would we? No. So back up your alarming conclusions with some measurable, testable, real world evidence. If you can find any.
Slioch (04:46:19) :
the NASA GISS temperatures series
James Hansen is a radical environmental activist who refuses Freedom Of Information requests. Clearly his data set cannot be trusted.
Slioch (01:57:30) :
No. I said it for three reasons:
Actually you didn’t say it because you want to cherry pick.
Slioch, you’ve got the propaganda in high gear. You surpass most others who use sophistry and cherry picking.
“Slioch (04:46:19) :
Since the Arctic is warming rapidly this then contributes to the warming shown in the NASA GISS series.”
Wouldn’t that lead to a melting of the ice cap?
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/ice-area-and-extent-in-arctic
Looks rather normal to me. No significant melting. Are you sure your data is correct?
Wayne S (18:22:13) :
A C Osborn (06:59:41)
I am not arguing climate warming or cooling here. That will sort itself out over the next decade by the art of careful data gathering and interpretation, not by diatribe on a website like this.
For art substitute creative adjustment of reality and interpretation substitute change it to show MMGW.
@ photon without a Higgs (17:25:16) :
” Despite the fact that the earth stopped warming in 1998 …”
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998/trend – It’s not statistically significant, but the trend IS up; skeptic used to say “its been cooling since 1998”. No fair moving the goalposts. [ Results 1 – 10 of about 897 from wattsupwiththat.com for “cooling since 1998”]
“If that’s not good enough then start with 1000 A.D.”
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/law10be-GtkrA.jpg – A plot of Law Dome borehole temperature and 10Be isotope level(a proxy for GCR/TSI). The Medieval Warm Period wasn’t a global phenomenon – it would be more accurate to call it the Medieval European Warm Period.
“There has been a cooling trend on earth from all of these times until now.”
George Will may think so, but the data don’t support this claim.
“Manmade global warming is not happening—unless you want to talk about UHI—”
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/about/response-v2.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_0-gX7aUKk (really snarky)
“The foremost factor of climate that is now being the debated the most is the sun.”
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/window/fourier/from:1/to:50/magnitude/plot/sidc-ssn/window/fourier/from:1/to:50/magnitude/scale:0.01
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/pmod/offset:-1366.5/mean:10/scale:0.5/plot/hadcrut3vnh/mean:30/from:1900/plot/esrl-co2/scale:0.008/offset:-2.6/plot/sidc-ssn/scale:0.002/mean:10/from:1900/offset:-0.2
The largest component of solar variation in the last 100 years has been the solar cycle, but there isn’t any corresponding frequency modulation in the temperature record. For the full accurate record of satellite monitoring of TSI, the sun has dimmed slightly, while CO2 and temperatures have risen.
“Co2 does not control climate. ”
Start with http://www.wag.caltech.edu/home/jang/genchem/infrared.htm The same mathematical models that allow one to calculate CO2 IR absorption spectrum ab inito allow calculations of the greenhouse effect of CO2, H20, CH4, and so on.
Then read http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/arrhenius.html His model, simplified to allow him to do the math by hand, was inaccurate, but not wrong.
@ Smokey (05:39:05) :
“Please provide even one solid piece of empirical evidence that CO2=”climate instability”. Just one. That’s all I ask.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_420ky_4curves_insolation.jpg
When the sinusoidal forcing of the Milankovic cycle starts warming the oceans, they start releasing CO2 (feedback), which captures more IR (forcing), which increases temperature, which increases CO2, which Increases temperature…..
This instability causes the rapid rise at the end of the Ice ages, changing the sinusoidal Milankovic oscillations to astable multivibrator triangle waveforms of temperature and CO2. The lag is the time required for ThermoHaline Circulation to change the dissolved CO2 feedback into atmospheric CO2 forcing.
Smokey (05:39:05)
There are four errors/misconceptions/platitudes in your first paragraph, which is pretty good going.
1. “the Earth is emerging from the LIA” Do you believe it just rebounds, like a rubber ball, or do you accept that for the Earth to warm there must be a cause. If so, what is that cause?
2. “the planet has been warming naturally ever since … the last great Ice Age ” No. Temperatures on a millennium scale have generally been falling very slowly since the Holocene climatic maximum – with some relatively minor fluctuations like the MWP and LIA. They are now rising relatively rapidly.
3. “Nature goes in cycles” Try telling that to the dinosaurs. But, of course, there are cyclical climatic processes; often associated with orbital changes which themselves are cyclical. But are you seriously suggesting that ONLY cyclical events can occur? Incidentally, the very slow decline in temperatures since the HCM mentioned above is probably in response to the slow decline in NH solar input due to orbital changes. That that has suddenly reversed should start you wondering why, because NH that orbitally induced solar input decline is still present.
4. “not, as you claim, only “for the last few decades.”” I made no such claim. The “only” is a figment of your imagination.
The data for NASA GISS is publically available and is not missing, as far as I am aware, though I haven’t looked at it myself. Realclimate have a data page which may be of assistance: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/
If you can’t find what you want, why not ask there? Or are you actually not remotely interested in the truth about the data but just prefer throwing mud in the hope that some will stick?
You then resort to a silly comment about “sinister acts of evil humans”, and then provide a few passing insults “wild-eyed raving” “We wouldn’t want to think you’re a lunatic”.
Do you really think that those sorts of comments strengthen whatever point you are trying to make? If you think that there is something incorrect about identifying climatic instabilities with the problems I mentioned then try to phrase your concerns coherently.
As for “CO2=”climate instability””. I wouldn’t put it quite like that, but basically the evidence boils down to the following points:
1. There is a natural greenhouse effect that maintains the Earth’s surface at about 33C above what it would otherwise be.
2. CO2 is one of those natural greenhouse gases. This is shown by its ability to absorb infra-red radiation of particular wavelengths and by satellite observations of those wavelengths being absorbed.
3. Anthropogenic emissions of CO2 have increased atmospheric concentrations by over 38% since 1750 and CO2 levels are currently increasing at a rate about 60 times faster than at any time during the last more than 800,000 years (evidence from ice cores).
4. Numerous studies involving paleoclimatic data indicate that doubling of CO2 (from approximately present concentrations) eventually (after several decades) causes an increase in average global temperature of about 3C.
5. Increase in temperature is an important aspect of climate instability but in its wake causes other effects such as changes in rainfall distributions that cause disruptions to agricultural capacity. Such changes are already occurring (East Africa, Andes, Australia) and may be linked to AGW, though of course changes occur naturally also, so disentangling anthropogenic and natural causes is not easy.
But let me ask you one question myself. Is there some evidence that you think that we should be seeing already, if AGW is real, that we are not seeing? What “measurable, testable, real world evidence” can you provide that falsifies the proposition that AGW is occurring?
Though I’m afraid I may not have time to reply – I have other things to do. But I will try.
Brian Dodge (08:45:11) :
@ Smokey (05:39:05) :
“Please provide even one solid piece of empirical evidence that CO2=”climate instability”. Just one. That’s all I ask.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok_420ky_4curves_insolation.jpg
When the sinusoidal forcing of the Milankovic cycle starts warming the oceans, they start releasing CO2 (feedback), which captures more IR (forcing), which increases temperature, which increases CO2, which Increases temperature…..
This instability causes the rapid rise at the end of the Ice ages, changing the sinusoidal Milankovic oscillations to astable multivibrator triangle waveforms of temperature and CO2. The lag is the time required for ThermoHaline Circulation to change the dissolved CO2 feedback into atmospheric CO2 forcing.
If as you say the CO2 is forcing the Temperature, please explain the rapid temperature decline after every rise, why did they all not continue to force ever higher temperatures and burn off the atmosphere?
Did we run out of CO2?
DirkH (05:56:58)
You are looking at the wrong graph if you want to see the trend over recent decades. Try this one for size:
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/total-icearea-from-1978-2007
(second graph down).
This also, about millennium scale temperature changes in the Arctic, might be of interest:
http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2009/arctic2k.jsp
It states, “Arctic temperatures in the 1990s reached their warmest level of any decade in at least 2,000 years, new research indicates. The study, which incorporates geologic records and computer simulations, provides new evidence that the Arctic would be cooling if not for greenhouse gas emissions that are overpowering natural climate patterns.”
A C Osborn (09:58:07) :
“If as you say the CO2 is forcing the Temperature, please explain the rapid temperature decline after every rise, why did they all not continue to force ever higher temperatures and burn off the atmosphere?
Did we run out of CO2?”
If you look at the CO2 concentrations from the Vostok core (or indeed Dome C that goes back 800,000 years) you will find that CO2 concentrations never exceeded 300ppmv (up from about 180ppmv) during all of that time. That is c.87ppmv below what they are at present. The increase in CO2 was enough to augment the Milankovitch warming but not enough to sustain it when the the orbital changes turned negative.
Brian Dodge (08:45:11),
I should have known Wikipedia would be used as if it were an unbiased resource. Here is a graph showing more relevant detail: click. Notice that the rise in CO2 follows the rise in temperature.
So now you can start over and try to find empirical evidence that CO2 causes AGW. Avoid Wikipedia unless you’re very, very desperate. And remember that empirical evidence excludes all model “evidence”, which is not evidence at all. Models are tools, like Jimmy Wales [don’t miss the links & comments].
@A C Osborn (09:58:07) :
“…why did they all not continue to force ever higher temperatures and burn off the atmosphere?”
http://www.ccsm.ucar.edu/publications/jclim04/Papers/PWG1.pdf or
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22last+glacial+maximum%22+gcm+correlation+holocene&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=2004&as_vis=0
The temperature forcing with CO2 varies as the log of concentration. The thermal infrared radiation varies as the 4th power of temperature. The exposure of cold northern water as the sea ice cover retreats acts as a competing CO2 sink. The albedo feedback decreases as the perennial ice cover declines.
@ Smokey (10:24:56) :
“Notice that the rise in CO2 follows the rise in temperature. ” That’s what I said – “The lag is the time required for ThermoHaline Circulation to change the dissolved CO2 feedback into atmospheric CO2 forcing.” When more CO2 is dissolved in the cold oceans at the peak of the glaciation, it is not a forcing. When the forcing of the Milankovic cycles come along, the temperature of the ocean starts to rise, and CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere, capturing more IR, and exaggerating the temperature rise. The CO2 rise lags the temperature rise because of the time required for THC to bring deep, cold, high CO2 to the surface where it warms and adds CO2 to the atmosphere; this additional atmospheric CO2 increases the rate of temperature rise, transforming the slow Milankovic variations into a “sawtooth” waveform. Your linked graph swaps the X axis(big deal) and shows the same data at the graph from wikipedia, but omits a plot of the slow Milankovic forcing. Some people call omitting data “cherrypicking”.
Slioch:
“Is there some evidence that you think that we should be seeing already, if AGW is real, that we are not seeing? What ‘measurable, testable, real world evidence’ can you provide that falsifies the proposition that AGW is occurring?”
First, scientific skeptics have nothing they must falsify. It is the burden of those pushing the CO2=AGW hypothesis to provide convincing evidence of the hypothesis’ validity. They have failed.
But since you asked, the Earth itself is falsifying the AGW hypothesis: as CO2 rises, the global temperature continues to decline: click.
By artificially ‘adjusting’ earlier temperatures downward, GISS [unlike the 3 others graphed here] pretends to show that the temperature is rising: click.
The most cooling has taken place since 2002: click1, click2.
And Lucia shows how wrong the IPCC’s numbers are: click.
Furthermore, the AGW hypothesis states that warming should first appear at the poles: click.
Also, your link to Arctic ice is obvious cherry-picking of one hemisphere while disregarding the other hemisphere because it negates your argument. What matters is global ice cover: click1, click2. Total global ice cover is increasing.
Finally, when measuring CO2 why go back only 800K years? Let’s look at some real geologic history: [click on the image to expand]. Notice that CO2 levels have been many thousands of ppmv, for over a hundred million years at a time, without causing runaway global warming. Life flourished. And the planet warmed and cooled, regardless of the high CO2 content.
Today’s CO2 level is one-tenth what is shown. There is no empirical [real world] evidence that CO2 will cause runaway global warming. As CO2 rises, the planet is falsifying the CO2=CAGW conjecture by cooling.
The scientific method is constantly avoided by the alarmist crowd. All raw and adjusted data, and all methodologies used to construct a hypothesis, must be provided openly, transparently and completely, so that other scientists can attempt to falsify the hypothesis. That is how scientific truth is learned.
But as we have seen time after time, the alarmist clique of climate scientists stonewalls all requests for information on data and methods. Why? Because if they provide that information, their hypothesis will be promptly falsified — just as Michael Mann’s hockey stick paper was falsified once the data was teased out by McIntyre and McKitrick. And Briffa’s claim that there was no MWP was destroyed by the revelation that his “evidence” came down to just one tree [YAD061]. These people make it up as they go along, to keep the grants flowing. There is no grant money in telling the world that the climate is behaving normally.
Finally, the burden is not on scientific skeptics to prove anything. The burden is on the purveyors of the new CO2=CAGW hypothesis to show that their hypothesis explains reality better than the long accepted theory of natural climate variability. They have failed, because their so-called “evidence” consists primarily of computer climate models, none of which were able to predict declining temperatures for most of the past decade, or even the severity of the last Northern Hemisphere winter.
The failed CO2=Catastrophic AGW conjecture is based on deliberately fabricated numbers, as the CRU emails show. The numbers were invented to show global warming because of a corrupting motive: many millions of dollars in annual grant money — which would stop flowing if the truth were widely known. That government grant money is abetted by millions more from leftist foundations and NGOs that have an AGW political agenda; honest science has nothing to do with their payola.
I have said it before in other forums, so I might as well say it here: anything for which the only proof offered is computer models of a chaotic dynamical system with unmodeled and potentially unknown in puts is, in fact, unproven.
It is hardly surprising that the predictions of the AGW-supporting computer models, which are the only supports for the anthropogenic causal theory, are being falsified by actual observations–from the lack of a hot-spot in the troposphere over the tropics to the recent general lack of warming if not outright cooling.
It is not a travesty that the ‘hockey team’ can’t explain the observations–it wasn’t a travesty that Newtonian physics couldn’t explain the precession of the orbit of Mercury–the real travesties are that they are rushing about inventing “gaseous Vulcans” to try to save a theory for which the original evidence was no evidence at all, but conclusions adduced from an apotheosis of SimEarth run on supercomputers, and that others are still advocating hobbling the world economy or worse on the basis of a flimsy scientific theory that is in the process of collapsing.
“Slioch (10:10:39) :
You are looking at the wrong graph if you want to see the trend over recent decades. Try this one for size:”
Thanks!
Smokey (11:38:48)
Very briefly:
You provide a number of graphs showing declining linear trends of global average temperatures since 2002. You apparently think these graphs are statistically significant: they are not. If you had bothered to look you could find similar downward linear trends elsewhere in the global temperature series of the last few decades at times when no-one disputes that global temperatures were rising.
For example, both HADCRUT3 and NASA GISS show a declining temperature “trend” over the period from 1990 to 1997, see:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:1990/to:1997/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1990/to:1997/plot/gistemp/from:1990/to:1997/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1990/to:1997/trend
Tamino has recently examined the question: “how long a time span do we need to establish a trend in global temperature data?” using the NASA GISS series as an example. His conclusion: “we need at least 14 years of GISS data (from 1996 to the present) to draw a confident conclusion about the most recent trend.”
See:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/how-long/
In other words, your many graphs are statistically insignificant. You are reporting on noise and not signal, and it is the signal that is significant with respect to anthropogenic greenhouse gases. They give no information about whether the climate is behaving as expected with respect to anthropogenic greenhouse gases.
The following, slightly earlier article, discusses the question of Climate Observations Compared to (IPCC) Projections.
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/03/26/recent-climate-observations-compared-to-ipcc-projections/
February of 2008 the Gallup Organization polled members of the American Geophysical Union and American Meteorological Society, the two professional groups for climatologists. Only 17 percent said warming trends so far convinced them that an artificial greenhouse effect was in progress. According to http://www.versusview.com
Brian Dodge (11:34:12) :
@A C Osborn (09:58:07) :
“…why did they all not continue to force ever higher temperatures and burn off the atmosphere?”
http://www.ccsm.ucar.edu/publications/jclim04/Papers/PWG1.pdf or
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22last+glacial+maximum%22+gcm+correlation+holocene&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=2004&as_vis=0
The temperature forcing with CO2 varies as the log of concentration. The thermal infrared radiation varies as the 4th power of temperature. The exposure of cold northern water as the sea ice cover retreats acts as a competing CO2 sink. The albedo feedback decreases as the perennial ice cover declines.
So as you have so rightly proved, we don’t have anything to worry about even if CO2 keeps going up then!
A C Osborn (07:30:49)
If by “worry about” you mean that a slight increase in CO2 will not of itself cause a runaway temperature increase of the Earth’s surface until it reached a temperature equal to that of the surface of the sun, then no, of course we don’t need to worry. The above gives the basic reason why not.
But then, no-one with any sense has ever suggested that it would. No-one is suggesting that an increase in CO2 will ” force ever higher temperatures and burn off the atmosphere”. That is just a straw-man argument – you make an absurd suggestion, wrongly ascribe it to those you wish to discredit, and then demolish it. It is one of the more discreditable ways in which those who wish to deny the reality of AGW try to prop up their fallacious arguments.
Climatologists assess the likely effect of doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration (from the kind of levels experienced historically) as ‘climate sensitivity’. Most calculations arrive at a figure of about 3deg.C for a doubling of CO2, once various feedbacks have kicked in and short/medium term equilibrium has been re-established. That takes several decades. Some suggest that longer term feedbacks, such as changes to vegetation, which alters albedo, might increase that figure to as much as 6deg.C eventually. As stated above, no climatologist suggests that it would cause runaway temperature increase.
Wayne S (18:22:13) :
I am not arguing climate warming or cooling here. That will sort itself out over the next decade by the art of careful data gathering and interpretation, not by diatribe on a website like this.
A C Osborn (07:53:23) :
For art substitute creative adjustment of reality and interpretation substitute change it to show MMGW.
No, I think I’ll stand by my original statement. Not sure why you think your substitutions convey my thoughts.
DNY (18:33:42) :
“I have said it before in other forums, so I might as well say it here: anything for which the only proof offered is computer models of a chaotic dynamical system with unmodeled and potentially unknown in puts is, in fact, unproven. ”
Unproven? A model is not a proof. It’s a tool.
Are you denouncing the input data, the modeling algorithm, or models in general?
If you are denouncing the first two, are you making contributions to fix the problem(s) that you have perceived?
If you are denouncing the latter, you are trashing all of science, technology and some of philosophy since it’s beginnings. Mathematics itself is merely an abstraction tool that we use to quantify the observations we can measure. Science takes these observations, organizes them into mathematical models and attempts to predict behavior. Technology uses these models developed by science to create all the widgets that have brought us into the the modern age.
If you were to remove all the every day items that were derived by a model, there would be nothing left but a “Garden of Eden”.
If you set out to predict the future climate, the only tool you have is a model, unless you have some sort of communication link with a deity.
Or you can sit back or denounce and hope that every thing turns out OK. Your choice.