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.
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.
@ur momisugly 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.