By Steven Goddard
As reported on WUWT, NOAA is warning of “earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons.” But what NOAA isn’t saying is that snow is falling earlier and heavier in the Northern Hemisphere. Rutgers University Global Snow Lab has reported that January was the sixth snowiest on record, and that six out of the last eight Januaries were above normal snowfall.
January, 2008 saw the second greatest snow extent ever recorded. December was the third snowiest on record in the Northern Hemisphere and seventeen out of last twenty-one Decembers were above normal snowfall. November was above normal snowfall and fifteen out of the last nineteen Novembers have had above average snowfall. October was the sixth snowiest October on record and seven out of the last ten Octobers have had above average snowfall.
Source : Rutgers University Global Snow Lab
The data shows unequivocally that snow is coming earlier and heavier than it used to. Perhaps the snow season is shifting, rather than shortening? NOAA’s failure to mention this is negligent at best.
As far as their claim of “extended ice free seasons” goes, Roger Pielke Sr. has reported :
The finding in this data is that there is no clear evidence of a delay in the start of the later summer/early fall freeze up or [an earlier] start of the late winter/early spring melt despite the well below average areal sea ice coverage.
So why isn’t NOAA highlighting the other half of the story? Do readers have any ideas?
What NOAA Isn’t Saying About Snow and Ice
As reported on WUWT, NOAA is warning of “earlier snowmelt and extended ice-free seasons.” But what NOAA isn’t saying is that snow is falling earlier and heavier in the Northern Hemisphere. Rutgers University Global Snow Lab has reported that January was the sixth snowiest on record, and that six out of the last eight Januaries were above normal snowfall. January, 2008 saw the second greatest snow extent ever recorded. December was the third snowiest on record in the Northern Hemisphere and seventeen out of last twenty-one Decembers were above normal snowfall. November was above normal snowfall and fifteen out of the last nineteen Novembers have had above average snowfall. October was the sixth snowiest October on record and seven out of the last ten Octobers have had above average snowfall.
Source : Rutgers University Global Snow Lab
The data shows unequivocally that snow is coming earlier and heavier than it used to. Perhaps the snow season is shifting, rather than shortening? NOAA’s failure to mention this is negligent at best.
As far as their claim of “extended ice free seasons” goes, Roger Pielke Sr. has reported :
The finding in this data is that there is no clear evidence of a delay in the start of the later summer/early fall freeze up or [an earlier] start of the late winter/early spring melt despite the well below average areal sea ice coverage.
So why isn’t NOAA highlighting the other half of the story? Do readers have any ideas?
From The Independent on 20 March 2000 we got the headline: “Snowfalls are
now just a thing of the past”. According to Dr David Viner, a senior
research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of
East Anglia, within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and
exciting event”.
Both lying and wrong.
We are required to discard models that are so wrong.
They are the government. After seeing people yelling at politicians at the Town Hall meetings how they didn’t want Obamacare and then seeing the election results in Massachusetts where the man who won ran on how he would be the vote that stopped Obamacare, yet seeing some politicians still saying they will pass Obamacare, it’s more of the same type of thing to have the NOAA say we are going to all die from global warming even though the real world doesn’t agree with them.
John Hooper (04:58:05),
You gave your list of alarmist scientists [including the wacked out John Holdren] who are living on public taxpayers’ grant money, so I will give you just one list of scientists totaling triple your number; the signers of the OISM Petition, which states:
Nice try there, John. Thanx for playing, and Vanna has some wonderful parting gifts for you on your way out.
Steve Goddard, I don’t know whether you have seen it, there is a post on Tips & Notes where someone was trying to get in touch with you.
Richard Woolley (09:07:34) :
I am trying to get in touch with Steve Goddard.
Trying to find out more information about the CRU normals data set that COLA is using the their maps.
We here at Weather Trends run a worldwide MOS using actual observed data and gridded NCEP reanalysis data combined with the 00Z GFS forecast.
Seems most of our trends follow the COLA site very well except for Africa and S. America. Looks like the normal we use is lower than the CRU normals. Hence the lack of significant cold anomalies in those regions, The footprint looks right so I think the forecast is similar so it must be in the normals.
Does CRU interpolate daily normals and so forth and roll it up into a week?
Anyway feel free to contact me, you guys and Anthony do a wonderful job keeping the other hacks honest…
Q: “So why isn’t NOAA highlighting the other half of the story?”
A: “Funding.”
ThinkingBeing (05:27:50) :
So the 59.9″ in Chicago in 1929/30 and the 66.4″ in 1951/52 were also evidence of AGW were they?
What about before 1928?
Stereo Behind EUVI 195
2010-02-09 13:46:19
http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/beacon/latest/behind_euvi_195_latest.jpg
Confused Sun ?
John Hooper (04:58:05) :
Yes, the following organizations at the very least are implicated in a massive conspiracy:
http://www.logicalscience.com/consensus/consensus.htm
It’s like Watergate, except this time the water is frozen.
————-
Reply:
I’d say you’re right, John. All that has to happen is for the hockey stick adjustment be applied to all the terrestrial data sets (for which we have example after example after example) and people (yes, even “scientists”) will go running around screaming like chickens with their heads cut off that the earth is about to die from a fever.
Utter nonsense.
The earth is warming gradually after the Little Ice Age and i’m glad it is, although this may just be the precursor to the next Ice Age (which they’ll blame on anthropogenic CO2 too when it comes around; just wait and see!)
And when that happens, we are in such deep doo doo you can’t begin to imagine. THAT will be truly catastrophic!
it’s worse than I thought … looking at climatewatch.noaa.gov.
This doesn’t look at all like a gov-Website but like greenpeace or any other propaganda site, a bad one.
The good news, it’s not my tax money wasted there.
@Rob (05:09:32) :
“The Guardian media group controls the majority of local newspapers in UK,
Not any more, might get more balanced reporting in locals now.”
Not so sure Rob, as Trinity Mirror is the owner of the Daily and Sunday Mirrors, both of which are staunch Labour supporters. It’s hard to believe they will diverge seriously from NuLab policy on AGW, which is rabidly anti-sceptic and anti-science. A scatologically (and fundament-ally) profane phrase comes to mind, which uses the adjectives “same” and “different”. 🙂
Did I read somewhere that albedo in the far IR, where CO2 “works”, is different from that in visible spectrum and much closer to Blackbody?
This was in the context of calculating from 1st principles what the Earth’s temp would be with no atmosphere ie if a blackbody in radiation equilibrium to incoming solar radiation… the result was – 35C or so , which I was concerned about because of emissivity prob less than 1 and internal heat source (it’s hot down there!) which I haven’t researched tho’.
Just mention it because of the calculations higher up the thread using assumed albedo numbers…. sceptics need to be ultra careful, unlike alarmists?
http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_anom.php?ui_set=0&ui_region=nhland&ui_month=1
Note the running mean in this Rutgers snow anomaly graph. It includes snow cover for all four seasons. It is predominantly negative since about 1986.
This will surely melt the glaciers.
Doesn’t all this increased snowfall ( & increased precipitation in general) itself act as a negative feedback? Heat energy moves from the ocean to the atmosphere in water vapor , is released in the atmosphere as snow or rain falls back down.
How about February, March, April? Bad news there?
Anyway, warming should imply more precipitation.
If warming goes from -10° C to -1° C, that means more snow.
Thinkingbeing,
“Of course, forty years from now, when temperatures have risen another degree. . .”
Here, allow me to correct a typo for you:
Of course, forty years from now, if temperatures have risen another degree. . .
RockyRoad (06:16:09) :
————-
“Reply:
The earth is warming gradually after the Little Ice Age and i’m glad it is……”
Recorded UK temperatures have oscillated, during last 300 years with a period of about 50+ years. While in the long term winters’ temps have risen (0.4C/century), summers’ have hardly moved (0.05C/century).
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CETt.htm
The bottom half of the graph shows de-trended temp changes (upward trend removed from the data). It is obvious that both summer and winter temperatures show similar natural oscillations (sometime in phase and sometime out of phase – that is another story) plus linear (but different) upward trends, which I think are due to a slow recovery from the Little Ice Age.
This corresponds well with plenty of the anecdotal evidence of the very cold winters (frozen Thames etc), but very little about unusually cool summers.
More temps graphs at: http://www.vukcevic.co.uk/GandF.htm
Steven,
NOAA devotes a large amount of material — available to the public — on snow and ice trends: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ussc/index.jsp
Did you read this and consider including it in your post? Why or why not?
Bear in mind what FDR said, “Nothing in politics happens by accident. If something happens, it was planned that way.” From a “political” perspective, Obama is not making a mistake. He has more to lose by changing his course.
It’s very simple. Obama is trapped. He promised the greens they’d get what they wanted if they backed him. If he backs off, they’ll turn on him, or at least turn away from him, and the Dems will lose monetary, foot-soldier, and editorial support in 2010 and 2012. The greens might even run a competing presidential candidate and sink the Dems in 2012, the way Nader did before. Obama can’t dismount this tiger until well into his second term.
John Freeland,
The graph you referenced includes summer snow extent. This article is discussing the increase in autumn/winter snow. Note the blue lines in the graph (winter) are showing strong positive anomalies.
Are there any reports that all of these abnormal conditions are affecting NH specific parameters at all? Are there sites tracking hemisphere specific temperatures and data? Specifically hemispheric albedo.
Henry chance,
I don’t think anyone was lying about that prediction. Winters in the UK were very warm 10 years ago and it was easy for people to trust Hansen and believe that it was just going to get warmer.
Why don’t they report the earlier onset of snow, you ask?
Well, that would fall under the rubric of “An Inconvenient Truth.”
Sorry, I know it’s pretty old, but I couldn’t resist.
National Opptrunistic Oral Abnormities?
National Organized Abnormal Adjustifications