It’s almost as if the planet is trying to send a message to Washington. I find the choice of words from NOAA/NWS (see below the read more line) interesting when they say”
AS WITH ANY MAJOR CLIMATE RECORD ACHIEVEMENT…
Perhaps in this one case, weather is climate.
From NWS:
The seasonal snowfall total in Washington DC stands at 54.9 inches. This would break the previous all-time seasonal snowfall record for Washington DC of 54.4 inches set in the winter of 1898-99.
And the snow continues tonight. A blizzard warning remains in effect until 10PM EST with snow tapering off after that. Here are preliminary snowfall reports from the NOAA/NWS in Baltimore:
While there will be a break, my forecast engine says there may be more snow next Monday.
Here’s the details on the breaking of the all-time snowfall Wahington and Baltmore record from the NWS:
PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BALTIMORE MD/WASHINGTON DC 300 PM EST WED FEB 10 2010 ...PRELIMINARY ALL-TIME SEASONAL SNOWFALL RECORDS SET AT THE THREE MAJOR CLIMATE SITES IN THE BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON AREA... AS OF 2 PM TODAY...WITH THE 9.8 INCH TWO-DAY SNOWFALL TOTAL MEASURED AT RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT...THE SEASONAL SNOWFALL TOTAL IN WASHINGTON DC STANDS AT 54.9 INCHES. THIS WOULD BREAK THE PREVIOUS ALL-TIME SEASONAL SNOWFALL RECORD FOR WASHINGTON DC OF 54.4 INCHES SET IN THE WINTER OF 1898-99. OFFICIAL SNOWFALL RECORDS FOR WASHINGTON DC DATE BACK 126 YEARS TO 1884. AS OF 1 PM TODAY...WITH THE 11.9 INCH TWO-DAY SNOWFALL TOTAL MEASURED AT BALTIMORE/WASHINGTON INTERNATIONAL THURGOOD MARSHALL AIRPORT...THE SEASONAL SNOWFALL TOTAL IN BALTIMORE STANDS AT 72.3 INCHES. THIS WOULD BREAK THE PREVIOUS ALL-TIME SEASONAL SNOWFALL RECORD FOR BALTIMORE OF 62.5 INCHES SET IN THE WINTER OF 1995-96. OFFICIAL SNOWFALL RECORDS FOR BALTIMORE DATE BACK 118 YEARS TO 1893. FINALLY...AS OF YESTERDAY...THIS YEARS SEASONAL SNOWFALL TOTAL AT DULLES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT STOOD AT 63.5 INCHES. THIS WOULD BREAK THE PREVIOUS SEASONAL SNOWFALL RECORD OF 61.9 INCHES SET IN 1995-96. AS OF 1 PM THIS AFTERNOON...THE TWO-DAY SNOWFALL TOTAL AT DULLES IS 8.5 INCHES...WHICH WOULD MAKE THIS YEARS SEASONAL SNOWFALL TOTAL 72.0 INCHES. OFFICIAL SNOWFALL RECORDS FOR DULLES DATE BACK 48 YEARS TO 1962. THESE PRELIMINARY STORM TOTALS ARE AS OF THIS WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON 10 FEB 2010...AND WILL BE UPDATED AFTER THE CURRENT SNOW HAS ENDED. AS WITH ANY MAJOR CLIMATE RECORD ACHIEVEMENT...THESE PRELIMINARY RECORDS WILL BE QUALITY CONTROLLED BY NOAA`S NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.
=============
URGENT - WINTER WEATHER MESSAGE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE BALTIMORE MD/WASHINGTON DC 720 PM EST WED FEB 10 2010 DCZ001-MDZ009-013-014-016-110300- /O.CON.KLWX.BZ.W.0002.000000T0000Z-100211T0300Z/ DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA-MONTGOMERY-PRINCE GEORGES-ANNE ARUNDEL- CHARLES- INCLUDING THE CITIES OF...WASHINGTON...GAITHERSBURG...ANNAPOLIS... WALDORF 720 PM EST WED FEB 10 2010 ...BLIZZARD WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 10 PM EST THIS EVENING... A BLIZZARD WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 10 PM EST THIS EVENING. * PRECIPITATION TYPE...HEAVY SNOW AND BLOWING SNOW. * ACCUMULATIONS...STORM TOTAL SNOWFALL OF 10 TO 20 INCHES. DRIFTS 2 TO 4 FT. * TIMING...HEAVY SNOW AND GUSTY WINDS WILL CONTINUE THIS EVENING. * TEMPERATURES...LOWER 20S. WIND CHILL VALUES IN THE SINGLE DIGITS TO LOWER TEENS. * WINDS...NORTHWEST 20 TO 30 MPH WITH GUSTS TO 40 MPH. BLOWING AND DRIFTING SNOW WILL REDUCE VISIBILITIES TO A QUARTER MILE OR LESS AT TIMES... PRODUCING BLIZZARD CONDITIONS. PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS... A BLIZZARD WARNING MEANS SEVERE WINTER WEATHER CONDITIONS ARE OCCURRING. DO NOT VENTURE OUTSIDE. THIS IS A LIFE THREATENING SITUATION FOR ANYONE WHO BECOMES STRANDED. FALLING AND BLOWING SNOW WITH STRONG WINDS WILL CREATE WHITEOUT CONDITIONS...MAKING TRAVEL EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. DO NOT TRAVEL. IF YOU MUST TRAVEL...HAVE A WINTER SURVIVAL KIT WITH YOU. IF YOU GET STRANDED...STAY WITH YOUR VEHICLE.
===========================
And here is the details on the Philadelphia record:
RECORD EVENT REPORT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE MOUNT HOLLY NJ 730 PM EST WED FEB 10 2010 ...SNOWIEST YEAR (JULY THROUGH JUNE) ON RECORD FOR PHILADELPHIA... WITH THE 14.0 INCHES OF SNOW THAT FELL IN PHILADELPHIA THROUGH 7 PM, THE SEASON TOTAL JUMPED TO 70.3 INCHES. THIS TOTAL NOW RANKS AS THE SNOWIEST SEASON ON RECORD, SURPASSING THE 65.5 INCHES THAT FELL IN 1995-1996 SEASON.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
We have had a milder than normal winter in Newfoundland so far … rain tomorrow!
“AS WITH ANY MAJOR CLIMATE RECORD ACHIEVEMENT…THESE PRELIMINARY
RECORDS WILL BE QUALITY CONTROLLED BY NOAA`S NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA
CENTER OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.”
(Waving right hand.) This is not the snow you’re looking for.
We’re up over 60 inches for the year, but we’re not even close to “snowiest winter.” As of yesterday, this is only #16. But there’s a ways to go yet. We did break our February snow record…actually, we obliterated it.
We’ve had some doozies in March, like the Blizzard of ’93. This isn’t over yet, not by a long shot.
Richard Sharpe,
Sea Surface temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere are generally running below normal. Particularly in the Gulf of Mexico and along the East Coast of the US.
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
(Note too the start of La Nina along the west coast of South America???)
Your statement that snow in Washington and Maryland has little to do with temperatures there, doesn’t make much sense.
@ur momisugly hotrod ( Larry L ) (22:33:57) : I can’t wait to see the snow cover satellite images a few days from now on the first clear sky day after this storm series. With snow that deep and this early in the season (low sun angle) that snow will be altering terrestrial albedo numbers for weeks. The same snow depth in March or April would go away in a matter of a few days due to the high sun angle.
Larry, one of our local meteorologists was talking about this yesterday. The temperature has dropped a lot because of the albedo–it’s so high with all the snow cover that we’re not going to get above freezing for at least the next ten days, possibly longer. And if we get any more snow (another storm possible Monday/Tuesday), it’s just going to make it worse.
It’s easy to see how, in theory, one bad winter, where the snow doesn’t melt until June if at all, could cause an ice age.
I think people who posts Fred Pierce’s articles from the guardian here should say its by Fred Pierce so I don’t waste my time going there.
I know this has been mentioned before, but I think we should bring it up again. Let’s not forget that NOAA predicted a warmer and drier winter than normal for the East. How on earth could their modeling have gone so wrong??
I’d also like to point out that Accuweather predicted a colder than normal winter for our part of the Midwest and a snowy winter for the East and Midatlantic, which was dead on. The only variance is this: We’ve received at least twice as much snow as normal–and obviously more than predicted–for the region.
Funny comment on newsvine in answer to blogger Eric.
If only that ignorant stupid Fox watching sun… and those uneducated right wing volcanoes would listen to you Eric.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35343948/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/
Skeptics of global warming are using the record-setting snows to mock those who warn of dangerous human-driven climate change — this looks more like global cooling, they taunt.
>>Well the precipitation aspect of AGW seems to be correct thus far.
>>I wonder if AGW takes into account the negative feedback that increased precipitation causes though ? Anyone know if that’s accounted for too in their models ?
>>REPLY: You are ignoring this is an El Nino Year -A
Indeed. I spoke to my colleague last night who is on a trip to Rio (where I was supposed to be, dang visa delay) and he is roasting like a hot dog on a hot grill, all predicted by El Nino just like the stormy weather on the west coast.
If a moron like me can understand this what’s up with all these so called scientists?
bill (00:28:54) : “Here in the U.K. we’ve just been told that, after 30 years of extensive research, scientists have concluded that Spring will arrive 11 days earlier.”
Well, well. I didn’t know that AGW was so powerfull that it could actually change the date of the equinox. Live and learn.
Not Amused (21:05:29) :
Well the precipitation aspect of AGW seems to be correct thus far.
I wonder if AGW takes into account the negative feedback that increased precipitation causes though ? Anyone know if that’s accounted for too in their models ?
REPLY: You are ignoring this is an El Nino Year -A
And the negative AO. I think that’s the main thing that’s pushed the storm track so far south. Up here in New Hampshire I think I got 0.1″ yesterday, it had pretty much blown away, melted, or sublimated by the time I got home. Our previous storm was 0.3″ on January 28th. I suspect if you look at precip over the east coast things aren’t far out of the ordinary. Don’t forget, the southeastern drought last year (remember that) was due to global warming too. Now that the drought’s over, doesn’t that mean we’re cooling?
I don’t see how a southern storm track ties into global warming. During the Year Without a Summer in 1816, the weather in New England shows clear signs of a southerly storm track during the summer I’d expect a southern storm track correlates better with global cooling than warming.
OTOH, the “amplified” jet stream confuses things a bit and allows cold air south and warm air north. All part of the ENSO/AO/NAO mix. Joe D’Aleo could explain a lot better than I can. He and Joe Bastardi predicted the southern storm track last fall, so I’m glad to see private sector AGW skeptics doing well in the long range forecasting dept.
You should be amused. I’m amused. If I can’t have snow here, DC is the best place to send it. 🙂
So a few years ago, the left was saying lack of snow, no more snow in WDC, proof that global warming was going to destroy the planet. So now we have snow coming out of their ears, is this proof of the next ice age is coming.
BY their reasoning, seems so.
Yet today the news is record snow is proof of global warming, so say the global warming scientists. So that’s why they now say climate change, climate change covers everything, so everything must be proof of global warming, or of nothing at all.
So positive feedback is now negative feedback, nothing to see here, move along.
Kay (05:04:26) :
> It’s easy to see how, in theory, one bad winter, where the snow doesn’t melt until June if at all, could cause an ice age.
That was one of the basic tenets of the impending Ice Age worry in the mid 1970s. A few months after I read that I flew across the country, I think around the end of February, and concluded unless the snow covers all the conifers, the spring and summer sun will heat up the ground level air just fine.
Regarding this recent DC snow storm:
Do you know what you would call three more months of twice weekly snow storms just like this last one?
One hell of a good start!
This is just a bit of bad weather, wait for a record 2010 summer – when it will be a bad climate. Or even a mild 2011 winter, which again will be evidence of global warming.
Just to repeat the obvious spoken by others, this snow event and its location has nothing to do with CO2. It is the classic coming together of a strong South to East tracking Pineapple Belt, El Nino driven, moisture ladened, Jet Stream bringing even more moisture up from the Gulf of Mexico, slamming into a negative AO. Wet plus cold = snow. We have had other El Nino’s just as strong but we didn’t have a negative AO. In those instances, wet plus warm = rain. 5th grade science text book, from the previous adoption, not the California Green newer editions.
Re: bill (Feb 11 00:28),
Yes Bill, saw the same report, also caught Richard North’s comments on it.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/02/shes-back.html
It appears that Louise Gray forgot to mention that the report referenced covers 1979 to 2005?
She also seems to have forgotten the piece she did in Feb of last year (2009)
“Latest spring bloom at Kew for 20 years –
After a succession of early spring blooms, flowers came out later this year than for 20 years because of the recent cold snap.”
Amazing really, but there you are, next scare, global warming is detrimental to memory!
“crosspatch (23:48:21) :
Looks like another storm winding up in Texas. I surely hope they don’t get another blast in the mid-atlantic.”
It is snowing in the Dallas – Fort Worth area right now. Really fun driving into work. This is the second big snow for us this season (the first gave us a white Christmas). Very unusual to have two such storm in the same winter, especially so given how late in the season this on is.
Keep warm everyone!
Forecasts call for continued negative AO with a waning El Nino. Meaning, snow pack will melt slowly in the East. That’s good. Wouldn’t want Obummer to press the panic button over CO2-caused flooding.
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao_index_ensm.shtml
Which if he does anyway, will really cast him in an El Stupido light. To state the obvious, I believe melting snow would be the source and cause of flooding? Somebody peer-review me, quick.
It seems to me that someone who was well versed in statistics could do a study of the frequency of new records, to track if & when the climate was warming or cooling.
If it was warming, you would expect that new high temperatures would be set more often than new low temperatures. Vice-versa for cooling.
“It’s almost as if the planet is trying to send a message to Washington…”
And the million dollar question is– what is that message???
Extreme snowfall and rainfall events have long been in the AGW models. More heat=more evaporation, to fall as snow in winter and rain in summer. General climate patterns disrupted.
On the flip side, those who believe we are headed toward another ice age would see this as a sign of that impending event.
Either way, this record snowfall is an extreme event by definition (as all records are). Just like the record warmth for January 2010…
Here are the temperature anomalies for a) contiguous USA and b) global temperatures for January 2010 from the two satellite series, UAH and RSS:
……………..UAH………….RSS
USA………..0.14C………..0.04C
Global……..0.72C……….0.64C
That is, in January the temperature anomaly for the contiguous USA was a whopping (approx.) 0.6 degrees cooler than the average global anomaly.
see:
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt
http://www.remss.com/data/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v03_2.txt
I think most folk have got the message that the contiguous USA is having unusually cold weather.
How many folk have got the message that, at the same time, both satellite series are recording the January 2010 anomaly as the warmest on record?
Sorry, final sentence, for clarity, should have been:
How many folk have got the message that, at the same time, both satellite series are recording the GLOBAL January 2010 anomaly as the warmest on record?
R.S.Brown (23:03:39) :
Damned groundhogs!
Don’t shoot the messenger … (cue dramatic music) … It was the shadow that did it.
Richard Sharpe (21:04:16) :
Steve Goddard (20:15:22) said:
54 inches in 1899 was due to a lack of CO2 and cold. 54 inches in 2010 is due to out of control warming and excess CO2.
Do I get a Nobel Prize for figuring that out?
As the actress said to the bishop, “Half an inch makes all the difference!”
You have yet to explain why it was 54.4 back then and 54.9 with elevated CO2 levels. (Although it could well be more than half an inch by the time this is over.)
10 02 2010
Richard I can’t tell if you are serious or just being sarcastic. Assuming that you are being serious then we are talking about an extra 0.5 inches of snow between the two storms. Ignoring all the other possible random reasons for the difference, let’s look at the water content as if it was a true indicator. Using the more or less standard 10 to 1 ratio of snow to water (relatively dry snow) this is an increase of precipitation on 0.05 inches in 120 years of raging carbon increase. Not really much to talk about even if it were true.