By Steve Goddard
The experts at East Anglia and CRU told us in 2000 that :
(March, 2000) 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.
David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes – or eventually “feel” virtual cold.
The 255 experts at the AAAS denouncing “climate deniers” in an open letter described this past winter in these cleverly sarcastic terms :
The planet is warming due to increased concentrations of heat-trapping gases in our atmosphere. A snowy winter in Washington does not alter this fact.
I appreciate that government bureaucrats believe that there is no world outside Washington, yet nature has given us the opportunity to grade both the predictive and observational skills of the experts. And it looks like they deserve a rather poor grade. According to data collected by Rutgers University Global Snow Lab, this past October through March period was the snowiest on record in the Northern Hemisphere – with an average monthly snow cover of 39,720,106 km2. Second place occurred in 1970 at 39,574,224 km2.
‘
We also know that the past decade had the snowiest winters on record.
A month ago I discussed an AGW sacred cow – Glacier National Park. At that time, a WUWT reader (Craig Moore) expressed his concern about the lack of snowcover in Montana this year. The good news for Craig is that as of yesterday, snowpack in Montana is 98% of normal. California is 117% of normal. Arizona is 175% of normal. Wyoming is 101% of normal, etc.
Every good and conscientious citizen knows that snow cover is disappearing due to global warming. Google turns up over 100,000 hits on that topic. This is what the disappearing snowcover looked like in my neighborhood yesterday morning.
With lots more cold and snow on the way.
http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp1.html
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Your claims is dishonest in 2 ways I will list.
1 April and November are not winter months. Winter begins in December
2 April is after March but according to your claim, It must be warmer in March than April.
The warmist mantra says hot and dry in the southwest. They must be wrong on that.
I do understand how prevailing southerly wind patterns bring up moisture to the Rockies. I also see the gulfstream influences the precip more than the calender.
Actual snowfall is condensation or reduction in energy.
Jimbo says:
May 13, 2010 at 12:29 pm
R. Gates says:
May 13, 2010 at 11:02 am
But Mr. Viner from CRU said 10 years ago that snowfalls would become a thing of the past. All steve is doing is poking their faces in it as they always point to a lack of snow as a sign of global warming. AGWers can’t have their cake and eat it.
Neither can you Jimbo, try completing the quote!
By the way Steve, I posted a reply to this when it first went up, still hasn’t appeared. That seems to happen a lot lately, what’s up with the censorship of contrary posts?
[Reply: no censorship, there were a lot of posts in spam today. A couple were yours. They are all posted now. If you don’t see your post after a reasonable time, make a comment. We get hundreds of spams, and the priority is moderating and approving the comments in the incoming queue. ~dbs, mod.]
nednead says:
May 13, 2010 at 12:20 pm
nednead, if, say, a guy called Lovelock, has a new theory, like for example, Gaia controls the climate ;
Let us say Lovelock claims that Gaia dont like that humans drive cars, and that Gaia will be angry and punish us.
If Gaia gets angry, it will snow less, Lovelock says.
Lovelock also says the sign of less snow means Arageddon is close, and we must repend, by giving him a new piece of paper, with Gaia printed on it. Lovelock says
he will print them, and they will be worth 10$ a piece. You must buy them from him.
He will then give these “car-driving-gaia-credits” to Gaia himself.
And say, you are a sceptic to the Gaia theory.
Then it snows more and more, year by year. instead if less. For 15 years.
And people continue to drive cars.
Would you ;
a) Conclude the Gaia theory is wrong.
b) Becomes sceptical, and decides to wait.
c) Still believe him, and buy Gaia-credits as fast as you can, even instead of food.
Then Lovelock says Gaia would also let it snow less. Because its the CHANGE of snowfall Gaia punishes us with! He adds (because he senses you are in doubt) that
its VERY URGENT to buy Gaia credits, because its only 50 days left before ARMAGEDDON starts. And, he adds, the Gaia theory is very robust.
What do you do then?
-Become more sceptical?
-Or buy Gaia credits?
-Ask for proof that Gaia exists?
They blow that theory away. 3 months cold in Florida is weather. 3 months extra heat would be labeled “climate change”
Kinda like Joe Romm on the Nashville flood. It was warming. 100 miles away there was no unusual rain records. That notation was irrelevant.
The Atlanta area flood broke a river water level last fall by .3 inches. The flood was man caused warming. The previous record of the 1920’s was caused by nothing.
Apparently the laws of physics are changing just as the climate changes.
R. Gates at 11:02 am said:
Really, more important to the discussion is how much of the record snowfall is due to the now waning El Nino, how much is related to the extreme negative AO index, how much is related to the leftover effects of the long and deep solar minimum, and how much might indeed be related to the longer term AGW?
So the past is determined by the future? That must be how the Thermos jug knows!
(Ah, you had to be there)
Really Gates, I love it when you pontificate and use those big fancy scientific terms like “snowiest”, “extreme negative”, “leftover effects”, “ground blizzards blowing”, Etc. (Hmm, anyone ever been in a calm blizzard?)
So Professor, how does that “evaporation energy” – opps, sorry it was “energy of evaporation” know what the AO “index” is – – or doing – – or will do? And where does all the energy go once it does its “evaporation” – – thing? process? Oh! and one more quick question: How many Gates does take to change a light bulb? HEY! I’m just kidding!
Here’s the real question: How much energy does it take for 1 US gallon of water to evaporate, at 50ft above sea level, in the shade of the old Oak tree? If you don’t know right off, maybe you could point me to where on the web the formula is located.
R. Gates says:
Really, more important to the discussion is how much of the record snowfall is due to the now waning El Nino…
That’s an interesting question considering 1997-99 (the years covering the strongest El Nino in a while) in that first graph shows a rather modest amount of snow cover. It’s not until 2000-2001 where snowfall seems to pick up.
R. Gates writes:
“Bottom line: Big snowfalls in odd places, etc. do not in any way invalidate AGW theory, and could, depending on the other factors mentioned above, tend to validate it.”
This totally misses the point of the story – the abject failure of “climatologists” to predict future events.
It also illustrates how incredibly flexible “climatologists” are in their finely tuned backcasting skills!
Phil.
I’m not a moderator. I have no idea what happened to your post.
Henry chance says (about R. Gates):
Your claims is dishonest in 2 ways I will list.
1 April and November are not winter months. Winter begins in December
2 April is after March but according to your claim, It must be warmer in March than April.
_________
Henri, your term “dishonest” is very strong, and very wrong. March, November, and April are our snowiest months here in Denver, but not our coldest. You are right that April and November are not officially winter, and March is right on the border.
Why is March snowier than April? Obviously not because it is warmer, but because it is colder. April see more precipitation than March, (i.e. it is wetter than March), but generally because it is also warmer, that moisture usually falls as rain.
My general point is that it takes warmth to provide the energy for evaporating the moisture of snowstorms, and warmer air to hold that moisture and bring it to Colorado. Places like Antarctica are dry specifically because they are so cold. My general point is valid and there was nothing “dishonest” in what I said.
Oh, and Gates, the temp of the H2O and the air are exactly the same, it’s a calm day, humidity steady at 45% and the open top 1 US Gal pot with straight sides (holding the water) is carefully set in-place at 10am on a Friday morning – – in May – – in the Northern Hemisphere – – did I mention in the shade?
stevengoddard says:
May 13, 2010 at 12:44 pm
nednead
Did Katrina cover the entire Northern Hemisphere for a decade? I must have missed that.
Typical response from Steve. Now a decade of slightly more snow fall equates to non-GHG-induced warming, whereas 3 decades of sea ice reduction doesn’t mean anything to Steve. Seems he only allows that logic when it suites him. Talk about cherry-picking and biased reporting.
This little gem is found on the excellent swedish blog “theclimatescam.se”(by Maggie “the mind” Thauersköld Crusell)
http://www.theclimatescam.se/2009/01/28/smhi-det-har-varit-betydligt-varmare/
historic weather.
The article start out with explaining how difficult it is to analyse old weather, we have only mesured data from ca 1880 globally.
From proxy treemometers we know the years 1860-1880 to be unusually cold. Now I will guote from just above the red arrow:
“You start att a minimum.
We know from different sources that the climate has beensignificantly warmer (underlined) than now at many times in the past. In the Viking era Greenland was habitable but theese settlements must be abandoned sometime between the 1300-1400. Since then it got colder, in the history books we read that it was possible to march across the “Stora Bält” (Great Belt, it is open sea that usually doesnt freeze).
The point the authou, Sten Laurin at SMHI want to get across is that climate changes naturally, always has and we should not jump to conclusion when it continues to do so in modern times.
What makes his statement noteworthy is that he is working at SMHI, the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, which is a governmental institution, and we all know where governments stand on agw (and the prospect of taxing everything remotely connected to energy and production).
–
Now move down to the next article:
It is from 1898, februari 3, swedish paper “dagen”.
“Our mild winters are not extraordinary. In the year 1172 the winter was so mild, that already in februari the trees were ready to bloom and the birds where busy building nests. In the year 1289 there was really no winter to speak of. In the year 1421 the fruit trees were blooming in march and in the late of april the cherrys were ripe for picking. In januari of 1538 the gardens were already blossoming. The year 1572 much resembled 1172. Also the winters of 1607, 1512 and 1617 were exceptional in their warmth. The year 1659 saw neither snow nor ice. In the year 1782, one hardly needed to operate the cheramic oven (googel “kakelugn” for images). Also the winters of 1791, 1807, 1822 and 1894 were unusually warm.
–
This is written an unusually cold may 13, 2010.
Trees have not gone into bloom yet, and I live in the southern 1/3 of sweden, I have cherry trees, but they dont even show leaves yet. This is the coldest year EVER that I have experienced and I find it very strange that It should happen in a period of alarming warming of the planet. I can agree that cold years could happen in an agw-climate system, but cold records? How cold would this winter have been without the agw-warming of co2?
R. Gates says: May 13, 2010 at 12:42 pm – Much like the “Arctic will be ice free by 2013″ prediction, made by ONE scientist, specific predictions of lower or higher snowfall because of AGW are irresponsible and unsupportable…
Not so Mr Gates – The IPCC – your Bible – also states “Confirmation of global warming comes from warming of the oceans, rising sea levels, glaciers melting, sea ice retreating in the Arctic AND DIMINISHED SNOW COVER IN THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE. ”
My general point about snowfall is that .. The last few years have been warm (based on global temps and ocean heat content) and wet (in terms of snowfall), and both are perfectly in line with AGWT.
In science if the prediction fails the hypothesis has to be rejected.
Your AGWT however seems to be somewhat miraculous. Something like Astrology. No matter what the outcome – the hypothesis is always correct.
Milwaukee Bob says:
“How much energy does it take for 1 US gallon of water to evaporate, at 50ft above sea level, in the shade of the old Oak tree?”
———–
To answer this we’d have to know:
1) The ambient air temperature
2) The shape and size of the container (especially the opening exposed to the air)
3) The amount of dissolved solids in the water if any
4) The relative humidity
5) Wind speed & direction (especially relative to the trunk of the tree)
Given those variables someone could probably get close.
Richard111 says:
“I am still hoping somebody will/can (?) explain to me how a so called “greenhouse gas” traps heat. Until I get that explanation I will remain a sceptic.”
I don’t know have to know how something happens to believe in it. I just have to witness it. I can feel and hear the difference on Texas mornings if the night was humid or dry. The humid nights somehow stay hot. I see it in the weather report, I feel it on the front porch as I smoke my morning cigarette, and hear it in the nonstop drone of A/C units. When we get a dry night, the report shows a lower temp in the morning, the morning smoke feels nicer, and the A/C units quiet down once in a while.
In the winter, I notice dry nights get cold faster too. And I hear that dryer places like Arizona get cold at night even though they get as hot in the day as we get here.
nednead
Yes. Sea ice has been declining for three decades – all the way to normal.
No. I am not going to play by your rules. I prefer to think.
It’s one of those crazy things that warmists can’t help but fall into: When we get excess snow in the winter it’s global warming because warming causes more evaporation and rain… when we get dry months in the summer it because of global warming because warming causes… what.. lack of evaporation and drought?
That which describes everything describes nothing.
If anyone disagrees with the numbers, please feel free to demonstrate that I am incorrect.
Otherwise, the snowiest October-March, and past decade of winters are statements of record – not opinion. Interesting that some here are incapable of distinguishing between the two.
R. Gates says:
May 13, 2010 at 11:02 am
“Denver Colorado, where I live has the warmer months of winter as the snowiest, i.e. March, November, and April in that order.”
So here at 11am R. Gates says March has more snow than April because it is warmer.
R. Gates says:
May 13, 2010 at 1:20 pm
“Why is March snowier than April? Obviously not because it is warmer, but because it is colder.”
Here 2hrs 20mins later, R. Gates says March has more snow than April because it is colder.
Thank you for a peek into the illogic and inconsistent thought process of an AGW advocate.
Amazing!
R. Gates
If you knew that global warming was going to cause more cold and snow, you should have warned Hadley and CRU when they were predicting the opposite. You could have saved them a lot of embarrassment.
R. Gates says:
Snowfall isn’t caused by cold,..
That’s interesting.
Steve, you’re really on a roll today…. great comments..
nednead says:
May 13, 2010 at 1:22 pm
Typical AGW advocate building a Straw Man to argue against so you may pound your chest like Tarzan. Perhaps you should extend your arms above your head to catch the points Steve and other people make. In this article he simply shows once again how a prediction from a climate scientist and the “convential wisdom” is not supported by the data. No where did I read that Steve said this disproved AGW.
Anyone else see that quasi 7yr signal?
http://climateinsiders.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/octobermarchnhsnowcover.png
Looks like the models need some serious updating… AGW seems to be less of a problem than predicted. Still AGW’ers confronted with new facts about cold weather try to save face chasing their tails with speculative explanations (so much for alarmism…). What a circus.