Guest post by Steven Goddard
As we have been discussing on WUWT, three of the last four months have seen top ten Northern Hemisphere snow extents and the decadal trend has been towards increasing (and above normal) snow extent during the autumn and winter. It appears that this month will achieve snow extent among the top two Februaries on record.
As you can see in the Rutgers University maps below for mid-February, the excess snow cover is necessarily found at lower latitudes. Snow cover radiates out from the pole, so the only place where snow extent can increase is towards the south.
The implication of the observed trend towards increasing snow extent is that the Northern Hemisphere autumn/winter snow line is moving southwards over the last ten to twenty years.
Daily Departure – February 13, 2010 (Day 44)
Source : Rutgers University Global Climate Lab
Daily Snow – February 13, 2010 (Day 44)
Source : Rutgers University Global Climate Lab
We see southern snow cover this year in places like Greece, Northern China, and Alabama that are not normally covered with snow in mid-February. The map below shows the “normal” snow extent measured since 1966.
Daily Climatology – February 13 (Day 44)
Source : Rutgers University Global Climate Lab
Some people have been claiming that the anomalous snow this winter is due to warming temperatures. The New York Times reports on the record snow :
Most climate scientists respond that the ferocious storms are consistent with forecasts that a heating planet will produce more frequent and more intense weather events.
It doesn’t make a lot of sense that warming temperatures would cause the snow line to move south. Lower latitudes normally receive rain rather than snow, because the air is already too warm for snow. Further warming would be expected to move the snow line north – not south – and that is exactly what the climate models predict. Indeed, Time Magazine claims that this has already happened: “large-scale cold-weather storm systems have gradually tracked to the north in the U.S. over the past 50 years.”
As far as snow depth goes, Washington D.C. recently broke their 1899 snow record of 54.4 inches and now has a new record of 54.9 inches. We are told that the new record is due to “extreme weather” caused by “global warming.” If so, what caused the nearly identical “extreme weather” over a century ago? Alarmists tell us that heavy snow used to be caused by cold, but now is caused by warmth. The 1899 record was set long before the hockey stick brought temperatures to “unprecedented levels.”
Now lets take their poor logic one step further. Ice ages occur when the snow line moves very far south. If “most climate scientists” are claiming that global warming is causing the snow line to move south, then the logical corollary is that ice ages are caused by further warming temperatures. Clearly that is not true.
Wikipedia map of the last ice age
Furthermore, Hansen correctly tells us that as the snow line moves south, the earth’s albedo increases causing further cooling.
The sensible theory is that the snow line moves south when the climate is cold, and north when the climate is warm. And the record snow we are seeing this winter is due to cold, not warm temperatures.
Today’s NBA All-Star game in Dallas is covered with snow. Last time I checked, Texas was in the South.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Basil (04:07:51)
Unfortunately no one seems to have been mapping jet stream positions globally over time beyond seasonal variability but there is lots of anecdotal evidence and also evidence that the ITCZ also moves latitudinally in line with global tropospheric temperatures.
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1755-1315/6/7/072010/ees9_6_072010.pdf?request-id=8e5e203e-0a2b-4cea-a76c-edf1713da5ad
http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~david/Sachs_etal_2009.pdf
I also remember lots of media reports up to 1998 about the jets having moved poleward. A Discovery Channel documentary blamed it on human emissions and suggested the poleward shift was permanent.
Now we have lots of reports (such as this thread) of the equatorward drift that I have personally been noticing for ten years now.
So we really need to firm up on WHY this is happening and personally I don’t see anything else powerful enough or correlating well enough other than globally averaged sea surface temperatures.
I may have jumped the gun a bit in the absence of detailed data but I have extensively explored the possible implications of those air circulation shifts having been driven by the oceans and it has built up to quite a detailed climate description that fits a lot more real world observations than anyone else’s.
There are lots of gaps to fill with more specific work from others and amendments may well be necessary but the general overview is looking clear enough to me.
That all leads to more discussion being required about ENSO and PDO in particular but although we have our own expert in Bob Tisdale he has told me in no uncertain terms that he is not interested in the longer term phenomenon or whether it can be made to mesh with his work.
A great pity.
Jonesll (04:26:55)
If you can get the LOD numbers to explain sea surface temperature changes and latitudinal air circulation shifts back to 900 AD or earlier then I would be very interested.
Icarus (04:52:23) :
What climate scientists are actually telling us is that heavier snowfall is consistent with global warming (because of increased atmospheric water vapour content) and that in a warmer world we should expect to see a higher incidence of extreme precipitation events. Neither of these things are in any way contradicted by the occurrence of heavy snowfall events in the past, for reasons which should be obvious.
Yes, obviously AGW/CC “theory” says that whatever happens now, it is “consistent with, and predicted by the models”. Whatever happened in the past is immaterial. Got it.
“Icarus (04:32:21):
Quantity of precipitation is related to atmospheric moisture content, not temperature.”
The article under discussion states that snow cover in the northern hemisphere is moving–and has been moving–south. This can only occur if global temperatures are cold enough to allow snow to fall and remain on the ground, and this has been occuring with more frequency over the past ten years or so. An increase in global temperatures may allow for more dramatic snow events (as you assert), but it should only be occurring at locations farther north, and this is not happening. In fact, the opposite is true.
I also take issue with the IPCC snow cover graph you cite. It shows a decline in snow cover up to approx. 2002. There has been a substantial increase in snow cover since that time.
“Some people have been claiming that the anomalous snow this winter is due to warming temperatures. “
Sounds like a negative feedback if you believe that. Snow has a higher index of reflectivity.
Henry Pool (04:58:55) :
Does he have any comments on which way the global cooling is going to go?
First: How the sun is behaving:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/PolarFields.gif
Then look at page 50, figure 9.1
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y2787e/y2787e08.pdf
So about 2020 we’ll reach the minimum.
More:
We expect that the next relatively deep minimum of the solar activity, radius, and radiation flux in the 200-year quasi-cycle will be close to the Maunder minimum level and will occur in the year 2040 ±10.
LONG-TERM VARIATIONS OF THE INTEGRAL RADIATION FLUX AND POSSIBLE TEMPERATURE CHANGES IN THE SOLAR CORE
Kh. I. Abdusamatov
This is it!
JonesII,
Your geomagnetic field data seems to lag the temperature changes. I doubt the temperature effects the geomagnetic field so it’s a spurious correlation.
Fine post. Great comments. I have gobs of data and hypotheses to send leaning-AGW family, friends, and scientist-acquaintances. Thanks, everyoneWUWT. Special nod to Moa Nony’s comments at beginning.
I suspect he’ll say, “down.” 🙂
I’m sorry, I’m terribly off-topic, but look at this quote from Gavin on RealClimate, regarding Jones’ recent interview:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/02/ipcc-errors-facts-and-spin/comment-page-3/#comment-159809
“Nothing jones said is out of line with what any of us have said on the topic. -gavin”
Wow.
You are killing the planet with this heresay. When will you learn that you can’t burn millions of tonnes of coal an gas and not kill the planet! Lots of snow storms is caused by Global Climate Change, clearly. Everyone knows that the Global Climate Crisis is going to cause lots of bad weather we don’t like. Here is a simple way to deduce whether weather is Global Climate Change Crisis Armageddon(GCCCA) related or not. Ask yourself do you think the weather outside is pleasent? If you don’t then that weather is made unpleasent by GCCCA. If, on the other hand, you think the weather is pleasent then we must move quickly to destroy capitalism so we can continue to have pleasent weather.
For example. Suppose you go outside and it’s nice out but a little windy. The wind is caused by GCCCA because of melting antarctic glaciers, something to do with salt and albinos I can’t remember the exact terminology. But GCCCA definitely.
Another refutation of the IPCC’s hurricane claim. Follow the link at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/15/hatton_on_hurricanes/
I thought AGW was going to give us droughts but the extra snow is blamed on an increase in precipitation. I’ve found another AGW guard to falsification.
1. AGW causes droughts
2. AGW cause increased precipitation
The outline of that ice age snow reminds me of a cold PDO, cold Atlantic Oscillation, a negative AO, and a neutral or moderate jet stream pattern circulating the globe. hmmmmmm
Icarus (04:52:23) :
aMINO aCIDS iN mETEORITES (00:33:42) :
As far as snow depth goes, Washington D.C. recently broke their 1899 snow record of 54.4 inches and now has a new record of 54.9 inches. We are told that the new record is due to “extreme weather” caused by “global warming.” If so, what caused the nearly identical “extreme weather” over a century ago?
=================================================
Important question.
What climate scientists are actually telling us is that heavier snowfall is consistent with global warming (because of increased atmospheric water vapour content) and that in a warmer world we should expect to see a higher incidence of extreme precipitation events. Neither of these things are in any way contradicted by the occurrence of heavy snowfall events in the past, for reasons which should be obvious.
——————
Reply:
No, but their AGW theory is baseless if it simply regurgitates the past. Besides, Jones is now telling us there hasn’t been any significant warming for quite a few years. So which is it? Heavy snowfall because we once saw increasing temperatures, or heavy snowfall because we no longer have AGW?
Since Jones also states that our current warming period is no different than past warming periods (i.e., the MWP), so unusual weather events can’t be used to support a debunked theory–take the “A” out of AGW and you’re far more accurate than if you leave it in, yet a debunked theory is still debunked regardless of the weather.
This is how ice ages start.
And to all those global warmers out there who are saying that AGW predicts more snow? Well I can let you off with maybe more precipitation but it should be rain.
Global warming? More snow? Nah.
OT: Many meteorologists break with science of global warming
No mention of WUWT, but Coleman and D’Aleo are mentioned.
My take is somewhat different, could be wrong but it keeps popping up in my mind.
I don’t take this as the start of a little ice age but it is directly related to the irradiation from the sun. This ties to Anthony’s post over a year ago in “It’s the sun, stupid”, search and look it up. In that post there is a chart of what the sun has done in the last decades according to Lean et al (1995) paper. Imagine of the trend line of that graph. It now seems more likely that she was correct.
In the last decades we have been in a period of increasing irradiation from the sun averaged over the years. During that period the earth was cooler than the thermal equilibrium it would have at that irradiation. This causes a drier period as excess heat is moving into the top layers of the earth. Less convection and condensation.
Now we are on the other side with decreading irradiation. The earth is warmer in the top layer of soil and oceans than it would be if it were at thermal equalibrium. The earth is getting rid of that excess heat as fast as conductivity and emmisitivity will allow. You get more water vapor and convection and that is the fastest way the earth can perform that. A wetter period. In physics it is realated to the minimum time principle.
Tom P,
I made it quite clear that I was talking about autumn/winter snow cover, and if you took the time to read the links provided, you would know that the autumn/winter snow line has been moving south over the last decade and has been well above the 50 year mean.
Graeme,
Do you think it is logical to claim that snow and freezing crops in Florida are due to unusual warmth?
Things cused by Global Warming
1)Snow (ie East cost snow)
2)Lack of snow (ie Vancouver)
3)Floods
4)Droughts
5)Warmth (NW area of NA)
6)Cold (Texas, Alabama and Florida)
7)Earth-Quakes
8) Well as Joe Romm would say everything
So there it is the Earth is heating up and is caused by man, what more proof do you need?
John
Not CO2 but the Sun
IPCC Corruption Included Ignoring Facts and Science
By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, February 15, 2010
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/20029
Phil Jones, disgraced and dismissed Director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU), granted BBC reporter Roger Harrabin an interview. Why Harrabin? His reporting has shown bias on all the IPCC and CRU activities. Leaked emails showed the CRU gang used friends in the BBC and that apparently continues. Prevarication, evasion, half-truths continue in Phil Jones’ answers. Despite this there are stunning admissions from Jones. “There is a tendency in the IPCC reports to leave out inconvenient findings, especially in the part(s) most likely to be read by policy makers.”
—————-
The Sun They Ignore
Why did they include ER and ignore major solar factors of the Milankovitch Effect and changes in solar magnetism that cause temperature change? The simple answer was to counteract the claim that the Sun was causing warming. Variance in ER for the short periods of record are about 0.15%, which sounds like very little, but theoretical calculations show a 6% variance explains all temperature variance in the history of the Earth. They manipulate the data and models to attribute temperature change since 1950 almost totally to CO2. As Jones explains, “The IPCC models may have overestimated the climate sensitivity for greenhouse gases, underestimated natural variability, or both.”
Tim 03:36:27 … less summer snow
Just an undocumented observation- I have been hunting in Colorado (sorry peta fans) for apx. 20 years around the September-Oct. time frame .I used to stop often in snow pack at around 11000 feet and have a snack for lunch. The last 5 or 6 years there has been no snow at all. This past year it also did not snow while we were there which was the first time that that has happened. Of course why is another question . I live in LA (lower Ala for you northerners) near the coast and we had snow last week for the first time in years. Why? GW? Pooh! The climate is always changing.
“Does this mean we can skip painting our roofs white?”
Yes, but you will need to paint the roses red.
Like a skilled swordsman, the media has put on quite the
display of their knowledge, of where the snow came from.
jack morrow,
What part of Colorado do you hunt in? The Front Range had one of the snowiest and coldest Octobers on record. A-Basin ski area had their earliest opening ever.
http://www.denverpost.com/extremes/ci_13751035