Headlines yesterday mentioned yet another new snowfall record: Moscow Covered by More Than Half Meter of Snow, Most Since 1966
Feb. 21 (Bloomberg) — Moscow’s streets were covered by 53 centimeters (20.9 inches) of snow this morning after 15 centimeters fell in 24 hours, putting Russia’s capital on course for its snowiest February since at least 1966.
Workers cleared a record 392,000 cubic meters (13.8 million cubic feet) of snow over the 24-hour period that ended this morning as precipitation exceeded the average February amount by 50 percent, according to state television station Rossiya 24. The city had 64 centimeters of snow cover on Feb. 23, 1966, the previous record, Rossiya 24 said.
In a story from Russia’s news agency, TASS, they mention that:
This year’s February is quite unique from the meteorological point of view. Not a single thaw has been registered so far and the temperature remains way below the average throughout the month.
I guess the Mayor of Moscow’s “Canute like” promise back in October didn’t work out so well. From Time magazine:
Moscow Mayor Promises a Winter Without Snow
Pigs still can’t fly, but this winter, the mayor of Moscow promises to keep it from snowing. For just a few million dollars, the mayor’s office will hire the Russian Air Force to spray a fine chemical mist over the clouds before they reach the capital, forcing them to dump their snow outside the city. Authorities say this will be a boon for Moscow, which is typically covered with a blanket of snow from November to March. Road crews won’t need to constantly clear the streets, and traffic — and quality of life — will undoubtedly improve.
Before they were saying that increased winter snow is due to global warming, climate scientists were saying that decreased winter snow was due to global warming. As discussed already on WUWT, climate models predict declining winter snow cover. And a senior climate scientist predicted ten years ago :
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”. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.
There is no shortage of similar claims:
Decline in Snowpack Is Blamed On Warming Using data collected over the past 50 years, the scientists confirmed that the mountains are getting more rain and less snow http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/31/AR2008013101868.html
Many Ski Resorts Heading Downhill as a Result of Global Warming http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=363&ArticleID=4313&l=en
The prediction below was particularly entertaining, given that it was made during Aspen’s all time snowiest winter.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
DENVER — A study of two Rocky Mountain ski resorts says climate change will mean shorter seasons and less snow on lower slopes…. The study by two Colorado researchers says Aspen Mountain in Colorado and Park City in Utah will see dramatic changes even with a reduction in carbon emissions, which fuel climate change …. . Skiing at Aspen, with an average temperature 8.6 degrees higher than now, will be marginal. http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/131044
Global Warming Poses Threat to Ski Resorts in the Alps Climatologists say the warming trend will become dramatic by 2020
Global Warming Poses Threat to Ski Resorts in the Alps – New York Times
Himalayan snow melting in winter too, say scientists Himalayan snow melting in winter too, say scientists – SciDev.Net
Global warming ‘past the point of no return’ Friday, 16 September 2005 Global warming ‘past the point of no return’ – Science, News – The Independent
So what are they saying now?
Global Warming could equal massive snow storms Great Lakes and Global Warming could equal massive snow storms
Snow is consistent with global warming, say scientists Britain may be in the grip of the coldest winter for 30 years and grappling with up to a foot of snow in some places but the extreme weather is entirely consistent with global warming, claim scientists. Snow is consistent with global warming, say scientists – Telegraph
Climate Scientist: Record-Setting Mid-Atlantic Snowfall Linked to Global Warming
The Blizzard of 1996 does indeed qualify as one type of extreme weather to be expected in a warmer climate Blame Global Warming for the Blizzard – NYTimes.com
The great thing about global warming is that you can blame anything on it, and then deny it later.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
R. Gates (07:10:56) :
Amazing what a warming clmate will do…more heat in winter=greater snowfall
Thou shalt not fib.
There has been no warming fo 15 years on earth. And there has been cooling for 5 years. This increase in snow is from cooling. What would have been rain in the past is now snow because of the cooling.
The earth is cooling. Global warming is not happening.
Jay (09:40:19) :
I think winter snow cover has both increased and decreased at various times over the last 20 years – which makes establishing a meaningful trend difficult
Fistly, what you ‘think’ doesn’t matter. The data is not hypothesis, it is not a computer model, it is not a guess. It’s just a set of real numbers.
Secondly, if you are not able to determine any trend in the data then just take a math class. You will learn how to do it. It’s not ‘difficult’ as you say.
Steve Goddard (09:51:55) :
If I have followed correct, Jay seems to base his conjecture on a false assuption, to me anyway. Yes Antarctica is as a desert and rarely snows but it’s because there is little humidity, all moisture has snowed out long before. It is the lack of moisture in the air, not that it is some -59+C degrees that keeps it snowless. Approach it from that direction. Can it be high humidity at -59C and not snow? If so, I am wrong.
Alexander Feht (10:33:21) :
…unlike some jar-eared ventriloquist’s dummies in Chicago on Potomac
Gosh that seems to fit.
Jay,
you site academia who are quickly losing their credibility. No matter what happens it is global warming. 5 years ago no one was saying that global warming would cause increased snow storms via declining temps.
The jig is up. All you enviros look down your moss grown noses at those of us who question the “established theory”. And for what, b/c your embharrased to admit your wrong? Or perhaps your emotion clouds rational judgement. Have you ever noticed that proponents of GW get very angry, insulting and insecure really when questions are posed? Those posing the questions just want answers that aren’t following a green agenda. Get real and get a life.
Jay (13:52:36) :
I can tell you for a fact that the Durham observatory site has seen a lot of building around it since the ’70s
DaveE.
Ref – R. Gates (08:55:51) :
“Heat=moist… Cold=dry… Last glacial period on earth was cold and dry… Simple physics.”
________________________
Don’t get me wrong, I was taught the same thing somewhen. But, haven’t you begun to ask yourself: “Where did all that ice come from?”
I’m beginning to think that during a 100,000 year glacial period there are frequent periods of Cold=dry which have very quick and violent Heat=moist phases that spin all that wet stuff North and South to the pole. Kinda like Hurricanes. Know what I mean?
During these phases, there’s enough cold to freeze all the rain on the way down to the surface, but a lot of heat to get all that stuff way up in the air. Remember that Spanish Armada storm?
What do you think?
Steve,
First of all, I quite clearly said Denver all along, never Littleton, or the whole state, or any such thing. The long term data for Denver quite clearly show March as the snowiest month, followed by November, and then April. But in regards to the data you were using, each of those sites from across Colorado have different time frames. Some run for 10 years, and some run for 20, 30, etc. How can you compare anything with different time frames? But even at that, March stands out over the long term as the snowiest month even across the whole state, but is far from our coldest, which is january, and January is our driest.
The point of my post (which is proven through the data) is that the warmer months of winter in Denver (and Colorado), are also the the highest in snowfall. When we get arctic fronts in Colorado we may get a little snow, but the moisture content is low. It’s the big spring storms that come across from the Pacific, that pull up huge amounts of moisture off the springtime warming oceans and slam that into the front range of the Rockies that really can really create the big storms.
One final thing, I mentioned the big Dec. 1982 storm we had. It was a monster storm. Dumped several feet of very heavy wet snow. There was an El Nino going on at the time (just like this year) and that moisture came from those extra warm oceans. It takes a lot of energy to evaporate all that water and then transport it to Colorado and dump it. You don’t see storms like that where it is bitter cold, and storms like that NEVER come from the north here in Colorado…ever. Heat is the energy behind all storms, and when that heated air runs into colder air…watch out! My point is this…if there is more snow being dropped in the winter in general, including the snow line moving south (which may not be true as long term trend), it can only mean that there is more energy available to create those storms, and that energy comes from heat…never cold.
R Gates,
It is OK to use a mixture of sites with different year ranges. You get a Monte Carlo effect which removes any bias. That is a standard technique used in climate modeling.
Most of the snow in Colorado falls in the mountains, where it is colder than the plains. The deepest snow falls at the highest elevations where it is very cold.
Did you look at the Colorado top 50 snow sites chart I generated?
https://spreadsheets.google.com/oimg?key=0AnKz9p_7fMvBdGhHc01yT25Ic0Nvcnc4SWNCWTlnSWc&oid=2&v=1266962445434
March and December tie for first place at 32 inches, followed by January and February.
The #1 site is Wolf Creek Pass which averages 78.6 inches in December and 77.7 in March, 435.1 for the year.
R Gates,
Energy flow is driven by differences in energy, not absolute energy. If you have two pieces of metal at 1,000 degrees, no energy will flow between them. However, if one of them is cold – energy flows very fast.
Bad tornado seasons happen during cold springs (like 2008) – not warm ones. Same for hurricanes. A cold North Atlantic will produce more hurricanes than a warm one, because of the difference in energy with the tropics.
Same for electricity, it only flows across energy (voltage) differences.
Snow in Texas happens when it is unusually cold. Cold is defined as the absence of energy.
Yet the Pacific Northwest of the US has been unseasonably warm for two months. Just goes to show that taking an average and calling it a global temperature is completely meaningless.
You can hire the Russian Air Force?
Do they have a price list?
What would they do for a hundred bucks? I’ve got plans …
Philip Mulholland (15:20:10) :
Thanks for the link. Cheers!
Let’s see: cold=dry and heat=moist. It must be awfully warm up in the troposphere and stratosphere where all that moisture is found in the form of clouds.
Why do certain people here insist on treating air-masses as if they are generated in the place where the weather is being monitored? I live in Canada. I’ve experienced some pretty damn cold winters with lots of snow in New Brunswick – including major blizzards when it was -20 degrees celsius; Montreal also in my experience can be bitterly cold and also see a large accumulation of snow. As a rule you don’t get numerous snowfalls when the temperatures are at their coldest, but as with all rules, there are exceptions. What matters is where the air masses and cold front originate. Also, to repeat the obvious, when the weather is warm and moist, one generally gets rain. It rained even in the depth of winters, and this occurred with greater frequency in New Brunswick through the 1970s – despite it being the great white north and before global warming was constructed by scientists.
Good morning Marcia.
Thank you for your kind suggestion for attending a course. Happily I am already engaged on such an endeavor and hope to learn much in the near future.
I’m afraid that establishing a meaningful trend that inspires confidence in analysis of data is not quite so simple, hence the field of study known at statistics. Generally speaking one wants to ensure, as far as is possible, that a trend isn’t the accidental result of noise amongst the data. The usual approach is to test the trend against the data to see how well it fits. There are formal procedures to do this, but Mr Goddard’s trend is so clearly divergent from pre 1989 data that, without a suitable explanation for why pre 1989 data should be omitted and without a postulation as to why projections of future snow cover may be faulty one can have little confidence that Mr Goddard’s trend will tell us something reliable about snow cover in the future.
“I can tell you for a fact that the Durham observatory site has seen a lot of building around it since the ’70s
DaveE.”
Thank you for your kind and informative comment David. I would be interested in hearing any suggestion you might make upon the subject of why the building in Durham since the ’70s influenced winters during the fast half of the Twentieth Century.
“Jay,
you site academia who are quickly losing their credibility. The jig is up. All you enviros bla bla bla”
Hello John. Thank you also for your comment. I’m afraid, however, that you have made a small mistake in that it was actually the celebrated Mr Watts that cited academia, but neglected on this occasion to properly reflect the academic explanation in his article. Perhaps this and similar miss-citations might go some way as to explain the unfortunate loss of credibility that you identify.
Thank you all for your comments and support. I must away to my breakfast.
Jay,
I have made it abundantly clear that neither I, nor anybody else, has any skill at forecasting future trends in snowfall. You are arguing against your own straw man. Winter snow extent has been increasing for twenty years and is near record level now.
What it does in the future is anybody’s guess. The climate models have demonstrated no skill in this area, or any other for that matter.
Steve,
Your lack, or otherwise, of skill at identifying trends in snowfall has no bearing on anything else. I would agree that forecasting based on simplistic analysis of snow cover in the recent past would seem to be folly – however the models use a physical simulation of climate rather than a statistical one. If your argument is now that you don’t have skill therefore other attempts must also be lacking then it must be noted that you are not comparing like with like.
Unless you can demonstrate that the increasing ‘trend’ that you have identified isn’t simply an accident of noise in the data *and* that it is sufficiently significant to show that the models aren’t fit for their purpose then it is simply too early to tell whether or not the models are useful in this regard ~ no matter how often you bang your drum or how much you’d like the models to be seen to fail.
Neither the data that you have presented, nor your analysis of it support your conclusion that the models fail.
jay,
There is absolutely no way to demonstrate that the current upwards trend will continue. Regardless of how high the “statistical confidence” is, it could reverse slope next year. And Tamino calculated 99% confidence before he started getting creative with his statistical manipulations.
If you don’t trust your own eyes, I can’t help you.
For the fist time in a month, today we have the first thaw in Moscow. It is just +1C. Normaly, February in Moscow has almost the same number of days above the freezing point and below it. By any measure, this February is exceptionaly cold.
Steve, you’re really doing the readership of this fine blog a great disservice if, instead of addressing the flaws in your analysis you just avoid the issue and twist Tamino’s stated views through 180 degrees when they find your analysis wanting. Looking at the conversation you’ve had with Tamnio I cannot possibly imagine that you are unaware that he is neither supporting your position or judging your plot to have a high degree of statistical significance. He’s telling you the exact opposite.
Until you pulled that one I thought maybe your enthusiasm was simply getting the better of you.
Steve, it’s not about whether I trust my own eyes. I’m as susceptible to sleight of hand as the next person. Which is why, when you make bold claims, my sceptical nature is inclined to go check things out. Upon doing so I find that you’ve thrown away half the data, that you’ve arrived at a trend that obviously fails significance tests (and which you openly admit you have no confidence in) and that you’re damning climate models by comparing smoothed plots from the models with unsmoothed plots from instrument data.
It wouldn’t pass peer review, would it.
Jay,
How can I have a conversation with Tamino? He censors my posts.
The OtherDan (10:20:58) :
The weather pattern has shunted all the arctic air south and west of New England, as New England and Eastern Canada has received a maritime flow over the top of those arctic high pressure areas passing to the south. I keep reading about Virginia shivering in sub zero cold (F) as we haven’t had more than one dawn below zero all winter, here in southern New Hampshire. I’ve rather enjoyed it, for a change.
However it is said you should never, never mention such good fortune. If you do you hex it.
No sooner did you mention how balmy it has been in northern Vermont than I heard a forecast that states you are in for a blizzard and four feet of snow, this Thursday. You have no one to blame but yourself.
I also hold you responsible for the two feet of snow we’ve had here in southern New Hampshire, today. Not too far to the southeast it was rain, but we’re stuck with this heavy, wet glop that the plows pile at the end of your driveway, which has the density of wet cement. My snow blower just rides up over it, rather than eating into it. BAH HUMBUG!
I should have known the mild and relatively snowless winter was too good to last. But it might have, if you hadn’t HEXED it.
Jay,
You are twisting words. I am 100% confident that winter snow cover has been increasing over the last 20 years, and am 100% confident that people playing with statistics will come to what ever conclusion suits their preconceived notions.
There is no smoothing in any graphs I have used, they are all raw data.
Let me put this question to you one more time. Do you believe that climate model predictions of declining winter snow cover during the last twenty years have been reflected in the Rutgers record?
Steve, the snow cover trend may be due to several different factors. La Nina puts snow in NE Oregon. El Nino with negative AO leaves us without snow but piles it up in the northeast. A blanket statement about snow cover does not say much unless you also include the variety of ways that can happen. The Earth is not a one-hit wonder. Many tunes play at the same time. What tunes were playing during the last 20 years?
Steve,
I think snow cover during the decade from 1989 to 1999 were exceptionally low (in the context of 1967 – 2010) to start off with and continued to decline during that decade. Snow cover increased from the levels seen in the 1990s between 2000 and 2010 because of a small number of years (4) with above average snow cover spread across the decade.
I’m not daft enough to suggest that a small number of winter seasons with above average snowfall between 2000 and 2010 invalidates climate models on the premise that they are described as showing a decline across the entire 21st century.
You linked to some plots from EEE that were way to small to examine individual years or decades should you want to (I’m under no allusions that models should closely mirror reality every single year) – but as far as one can tell most of the models look to be a pretty good match with reality so far.