While some other bloggers and journalists insist that recent winter snows are proof of global warming effects, they miss the fact that models have been predicting less snow in the norther hemisphere. See this 2005 peer reviewed paper:
Frei, A. and G. Gong, 2005. Decadal to Century Scale Trends in North American Snow Extent in Coupled Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models. Geophysical Research Letters, 32:L18502, doi: 10.1029/2005GL023394.
It says exactly the opposite of what some are saying now. – Anthony
=====================================
Guest post by Steven Goddard
A 2005 Columbia University study titled “WILL CLIMATE CHANGE AFFECT SNOW COVER OVER NORTH AMERICA?” ran nine climate models used by the IPCC, and all nine predicted that North American winter snow cover would decline significantly, starting in about 1990.
In this study, current and future decadal trends in winter North American SCE (NA-SCE) are investigated, using nine general circulation models (GCMs) of the global atmosphere-ocean system participating in the upcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC-AR4)…
all nine models exhibit a clear and statistically significant decreasing trend in 21st century NA-SCE
Some of the models predicted a significant decline in winter snow cover between 1990 and 2010.
Climate Model predictions of Snow Cover Decline
As we know, winter snow cover has actually increased about 5% since it bottomed in 1989, and is now close to a record maximum.
Below is another interesting graph. It shows the number of top 100 snow extent weeks by decade. I took the top 100 weekly snow extents (out of 2227) from the Rutgers record and sorted them by decade. The past decade has been at least as snowy as the 1970s.
The past decade has had the most weeks in the top 100 since 1966.
Above are images from NASA showing snow extent from 2001 to 2004. Below is an image from 2010, showing snow cover in all 48 states.
NOAA Image – February 12, 2010
========================
UPDATE: Here is a new graph of north American winter trend produced by Steve at the request of commenters:
So far, the climate models have the wrong polarity on their predictions of winter snow cover changes.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Is that snow in Mexico? I’m no expert but I’m guessing that is quite rare?
It’s good to see Steven posting again. I missed his posts while he was gone.
There is the most powerful repudiation of agw. You can actually see how cold it is getting!
So has anyone ever taken historic climate data, plugged it into these “models”, and compared them to, you know, reality?
Once again it is shown that climate models have no skill at regional forecasting. This sort of thing isn’t science, it’s pure speculation. Reputable journals should stop publishing these papers.
I have several conclusions when models are wrong. They in this case seem to leave out variables and make certain assumptions. It is a shame they are using models and ignoring actual temperatures and precipitation.
Test the models and find they are wrong, then we don’t accept their conclusions.
Will they revisit the data and post the new findings? Unlikely. Has anybody asked the authors, “what say you?”
I am shocked and bewildered! Computer models created to generate a specific output using questionable logic and programming didn’t match reality? I am quite surprised. It truly is worse than we thought…
Fortunately the ink was dry and the predictions were recorded. The words that the snow was exactly as ‘we’ said turn out to be the current convenient advantage of hindsight mixed with the hope of short memory of the public.
Thank you Steven Goddard for the clear as always post.
A proof that they change what they say along the way.
It should be more, it shold be less.
Oh another hockey stick that proves AGW!
Don’t you know? More snow means it’s getting warmer. Yes snow way down south in Florida and Houston means – WARMER!
Just another case of being wrong on so many of their “predictions”.
Maybe theyd benefit from a gypsy costume and a crystal ball to aid them?
Cross my palm with carbon….
It’s what you expect when your models have an in-built bias and no validation.
All that extra mointure going up there in the air like that, and spillin into Florida, Houston, Rome and hell even Baghdad. Damn it must be getting really hot out there! So Put on your aluminium foil suits
…or frrrrrrryyyyyyyy in the hot sizzling snnnnnnoooooowwwww…
O/T but I have noticed in the IJIS site with sea ice extent, that there has been a significant jump upward over the past couple weeks. Shockingly, there has been no press announcements about it by the warmists, even though, when it was below 2007 levels in January, they were all over it.
How to back up your argument.
This site is fun:
“…A complete list of things caused by global warming….”
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
Hmm… I find it interesting… those pushing the AGW agenda claim that the extra snow is an expected outcome supporting AGW due to increased water vapour in the air. However, this study clearly shows that the AGW predictions for the US was clearly LESS snow. So far, then, reality is falsifying the predictions, meaning the models have clear problems. If an AGW supporter would still like to claim that the extra winter snow is an expected outcome, can they please point to scientific studies showing that was clearly the expectation for the US? You cannot predict one thing based on your AGW science, then when the outcome is the opposite, then claim that *that* scenario is also consistent. Such makes AGW unfalsifiable and hence unscientific.
Seriously, like in my last posts, it looks like Arctic sea ice is going to hit the 14M mark. I didn’t expect it this year.
Oh! but it’s paper thin – don’t you know! The last polar bear is likely gonna drown this summer!
Sorry, but I just watched 3 min of that nutjob Rahmstorf, and this is what happens when you do. The guy just has a way of spreading his madness.
Do you know if there are any plots from the data on:
http://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/nsa/
that show the daily “Area Covered By Snow” data by year?
The coverage for US seems to be running 10-15% higher consistently this year (which agrees with your post). The data is accessible… I just don’t want to reinvent the wheel if a plot is available.
Thanks,
Bob
When the pundits and politicians say that the current snow storms are not “proof”, they are correct. When they say that they are not “evidence”, as many of them do, they are blowing smoke. Rising graphs may have ups and downs. They don’t have 100+ year records.
Re: the last map/image…
Snowcover on all 48 states, but also; All of Canada, except one tiny green spot at Vancouver. (Which is, of course, normal for them).
Silly, I know, but I can’t resist poking fun at the IOC and their ilk.
Yeah, but the IPCC has always been a snow job.
You`re using ths data upside down.
Thanks, Steven Goddard, for keeping the spotlight of public attention focused on errors in the computer models that were predicting less snow.
Decades of filth and abuse of science by the National Academy of Sciences and all the research agencies whose budgets require NAS review (NASA, DOE, NOAA, etc) are concealed beneath the climategate iceberg, so you can expect negative comments from those with a vested interest in the flow of federal reserch funds.
Hang in there Steve!
Oliver K. Manuel
Emeritus Professor of
Nuclear & Space Sciences
Former NASA PI for Apollo
It was Langmuir who said that it is a characteristic of pathological science to give ad hoc answers, invented on the spur of the moment, to any and all criticisms. See Number Watch for a listing of all Langmuir’s conclusions.