That’s from the avalanche center in the Tetons, and here is a current web-cam view up Yosemite Valley towards still-closed Tioga Pass (in the left background):
AP has a nice roundup of late snow and snowpack news (including the Teton quote). Just weather. No mention of climate. Nothing this time about snow and cold being caused by global warming. Now if we could just get the press to do the same when there is a regional hot spell. Still, it’s progress. Remember the spinning on last winter’s snowzilla?
Most amusing was Al Gore’s quote from “the scientific community“:
A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.
A click on Gore’s link showed “the scientific community” to be Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page. Gore should also have quoted Page’s credentials, which Page listed in his next line:
That’s simple science even for me, a guy whose scientific education pretty much ended with the old “Watch Mr. Wizard” TV show and a subscription to Popular Mechanics.
Unfortunately, Gore could have quoted some actual scientists to the same effect, as Andrew Bolt quoted the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research:
The overall warming of the earth’s northern half could result in cold winters… Recent severe winters like last year’s or the one of 2005-06 do not conflict with the global warming picture, but rather supplement it.
But as Bolt also quoted, the Potsdammer’s IPCC bible had predicted the opposite:
Fewer cold outbreaks; fewer, shorter, intense cold spells / cold extremes in winter” as being consistent across all model projections for Europe
What, are there no takers this time around? Are they tiring of the ridicule?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I can only assume that the radiation will get dispersed. Remember the atomic bomb blasts on the delicate Bikini Atoll. Now read how vulnerable corals are to a:
Yor fear mongering won’t work here old bean.
Here is the source:
http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/34672
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X07004523
phlogiston says:
May 30, 2011 at 12:38 am
R. Gates says:
May 29, 2011 at 11:02 pm
Are you seriously trying to tell us that snowfall and temperatures are inversely related? So ice ages are warm periods, and interglacials are colder?
—–
Did you pay attention to anything I wrote and especially my repeated explanation od the difference between snowfall accumulation and glacial advance? You have gotten it exactly 180 degrees wrong.
rbateman says: (to R. Gates)
“Nature is far more capable than you imagine, and your notion is contradicted by data.”
——-
Since you have no idea what I can imagine, your statement is a ridiculous from the beginning.
As far as the data goes, apparently you are also as equally unfamiliar with that as you are knowing what I can imagine.
My comment at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/29/may-snow-depths-are-deeper-than-anything-we-have-seen-in-the-last-45-years/#comment-670333
was meant for the Germany nuclear thread. Sorry. :>(
R. Gates,
A number of us have asked you about snow outside the ice core data areas. We are still waiting.
R. Gates says:
May 30, 2011 at 10:30 am
So, if what you say is true, Global Warming cannot cause Global Cooling.
Actually, RGates, CO2 cannot cause either one.
There’s not enough of it to go around. Like gold coins. You could gold plate all coins, but that doesn’t make them solid gold, does it?
Hmm….CO2 plated Climate Theory.
Jimbo says:
May 30, 2011 at 2:04 am
R. Gates says:
May 29, 2011 at 5:38 am
As noted many times here on WUWT, greater snowfall and rainfall are generally associated with warmer, not cooler climates.
The problem is that Warmists used to blame the lack of snowpack / extent on ………………………global warming. Please show me where you have ever set them straight that the lack of snow was due to a ‘cooler’ climate????
Please reply to this question as I am interesed in your answer.
——————
There are many problems with your request…the first and foremost being the fact that outside of occasionaally posting on Realclimate, JC’s site, or Neven’s arctic sea ice blog, I do far and away more postings here…so if some “warmest” was to come on here stating what you suggest, I’d certainly set them straight. Also, it does depend on the timeframe and level of warming they are talking about. At some point more warmth means snow is impossible and will fall as rain or jet stream patterns can shift from warmer temps and wet areas become dry in winter etc. So it depends on what timeframe the “warmist” is talking about.
Jimbo says:
May 30, 2011 at 10:45 am
R. Gates,
A number of us have asked you about snow outside the ice core data areas. We are still waiting.
———–
I am researching this a bit more in detail, but generally speaking we know that during the warmer periods on earth, most glaciers worldwide contract, though there are notable exceptions. I will get back to this question as it interests me as well…
A warmer globe is supposed to hold more water in vapour form so as to provide that positive feedback effect.
That should provide drier conditions overall so when precipitation does occur it tends to be more intense if in convective form but less intense at air mass mixing boundaries.
The opposite for a cooler globe.
However an ongoing process of warming produces less rainfall overall because less is precipitated out than is retained in vapour form.
An ongoing process of cooling produces more rainfall overall because more is precipitated out than is retained in vapour form.
The Earth is always engaged either in net cooling or net warming. Stasis never happens.
So, overall, if we are seeing more high rainfall events at air mass mixing boundaries (rather than from convective events within individual air masses) then the globe is cooling not warming.
Tornadoes occur at air mass mixing boundaries do they not ?
In the 1982-83 Winter in California, during a warm PDO phase and an El Nino, we had much the same snowpack accumulations as we do now.
What’s different now? It’s not melting:
Provided by the California Cooperative Snow Surveys
Report generated: 05/27/2011 10:28
Summary By Section
Section
Today Yesterday
NORTH Number of Stations Reporting 30 30
Average snow water equivalent 30″ 30″
Percent of April 1 Average 106% 106%
Percent of normal for this date 363% 345%
CENTRAL Number of Stations Reporting 35 35
Average snow water equivalent 32″ 32″
Percent of April 1 Average 105% 106%
Percent of normal for this date 259% 252%
SOUTH Number of Stations Reporting 20 20
Average snow water equivalent 20″ 20″
Percent of April 1 Average 79% 82%
Percent of normal for this date 180% 181%
Look at the % of normal for this date.
That’s how darn cold it is in California.
Here in Colorado some communities are preparing for a whole lot of melting in the next few weeks with flooding a real possibility.
R. Gates says:
May 30, 2011 at 1:11 pm
Did you know that the dry heat of the Dust Bowl began in California, then spread eastwards over the years? Regional Climate Dominoes.
An Ice Age scare has this going for it: an Ice Age (Big or Little) is the only real “tipping point” threat that we actually face.
Marc says:
May 29, 2011 at 2:56 pm
This whole dialog with Gates and the silly minutae is maddening!
All it proves is how little we actually KNOW. We have accumulated mucho data, but we are generations away from being able to synthesize it, if ever.
We will never KNOW what the impact of CO2 contributed by humans will be or is at any given time.
Most likey, the major climate developments will be driven by “Black Swan” events (Toba, meteor, celestial happenings, etc.) that will so greatly outweigh human impact that is frankly hardly worth talking about except to continue to advance scientific understanding for the purpose of advancing human engineering to make humans more resilient to natural phenomena.
Socratic Maxim: Knowledge of one’s ignorance is the beginning of wisdom.
The climate system and universe are so chaotic as to be entirely beyond the realm of humans to ever make meaningful predictions about the long-term future… a few days, weeks, months or years is the best we will ever do, and so far we are at the “few days” level of meaningful predictive capability.
So can we just admit that none of us know squat in the big picture?
The problem with Gates is that, while professing an open mind, is suggesting we are moving in on knowing the unknowable. This open mind to future developments is really only useful in the context of extreme humility in what we will ever know.
It is really juvenile to keep talking about what ice cores mean, because no one is close to knowing what they possibly mean for the long-term future. It is most likely that they are completely irrelevant because they will never provide us with actionable information.
Gates, in a non-ad hominem way, is a fool for not knowing what he can’t know.
I don’t care about the impact of CO2 because it is such a small component of the total inputs, most of which are completely beyond our knowledge and certainly beyond our control, as to be irrelevant in the scheme of truly long-term events in the climate and solar system and the well-being (or lack thereof) of mankind.
Engineering is our only hope, if we have one, which we don’t know. But we are genetically endowed with belief in our own future and the future of our kind. Hence we will always try.
Mr Gates: Wisen up!
================
This post was so good I am repeating it for effect. Worth reading in case you missed it.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
As for R Gates, beats me how he thinks he can take on the heavyhitters on here….and win…..RBateman and Pamela Gray, et al…..
Must be a genuine case of severe cognitive dissonance disorder.
Even so….R would be the one who would get (and actually deserve) a wedgy EVERY DAY at lunch time.
He is a glutton for punishment and completely brings this on himself.
BTW….R….you never addressed the “snowfall outside of the ice core area” thing….that many on here are pegging you on.
And your lame answer to Jimbo thereto…is not sufficient.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Bar the Gates and shut the Gore! These prophets of doom will be predicting AGW up into their 80s and 90s, all the while shivering in thermal underwear and goose down jackets as they proclaim the cold is due to heat.
“Of course. April months in Holland, ranking since 1706:
1. 2011
2. 2007
3. 2009.
Hottest, of course.”
Source please. If it’s homogenised, I don’t drink that shit. Only raw please.
As far as the 600,000 year Ice Core record goes, the current Interglacial is not the strongest, nor the weakest, nor the longest, nor the shortest.
It’s just plain average.
The Younger Dryas in the rise to it is not unique to interglacials, having happened before.
If we were at the mean Ice Core temperature, we’d still be in caves where the temperature of the rock in mid latitudes is a more comfy 55 F.
Remember to bring the dog.
And here we go again. Today’s front is pretty juicy for this latitude (~38N) this late in the season. Probably a bit higher snow level, though, seems to be some warm advection out ahead of the boundary. I’m guessing snow level will drop later today.
intrepid_wanders says:
May 29, 2011 at 3:37 pm
I had some field work north of Crowley back in the mid 80s. We thought it was a big deal that snow depth stopped us from getting into certain quadrangles in mid April and we did not finish until mid May. This year I’d imagine the same areas will probably not be passable without backcountry skis until mid next month.
AFTER A BRIEF BREAK TONIGHT ANOTHER ROUND OF SHOWERS WILL MOVE ACROSS ON WEDNESDAY AS THE TROF AXIS MOVES ACROSS. LIFTED VALUES WILL BE DOWN TO MINUS 2 WITH CAPES OVER 500 J/KG IN SPOTS PLUS 700 MB TEMPS DOWN TO MINUS 9. IN ADDITION…SOME WEAK LOW-LEVEL DIRECTIONAL SHEER IS DEPICTED. THEREFORE…THUNDER WITH SMALL HAIL AND LOCAL SNOW LEVELS DOWN TO 4000 FEET ARE ALL POSSIBLE WEDNESDAY.
===============================
With those CAPE progs and likely shear, need to also watch out for twisters. I digress …
In the classic depictions of glacials, the main focus in North America is on the Laurentide mass. I’ve often wondered about the actual sequence of events. I’ve wondered if the Cordilleran was not bulked up well prior to the Laurentide? That may set off a global chain reaction.
Forecast 40.75 N Calif. is for rain through tomorrow, followed by showers and ANOTHER one just like the other one come this weekend. It’s pouring. Forecast models are tied in knots as to when this will end.
Forget May.
It’s June.
Prog’ing even further out:
=========================================
BY FRIDAY ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT AN UNUSUALLY STRONG STORM SYSTEM WILL BE JUST OFF OUR COAST. THIS LOW IS FROM A SYSTEM NEAR THE ALEUTIANS THAT WILL MOVE TO THE NORTH PACIFIC WEDNESDAY NIGHT AND THEN DIVE SOUTHEASTWARD INTO OUR WATERS. RAIN WILL SPREAD ACROSS OUR AREA SOME TIME ON FRIDAY AND SHOULD BE WIDESPREAD FRIDAY NIGHT INTO PART OF SATURDAY. DEPENDING ON HOW LONG THE LOW REMAINS NEARLY STATIONARY WE COULD SEE ANOTHER ROUND OF WIDESPREAD RAIN LATE SATURDAY INTO SUNDAY OR SIMPLY JUST SCATTERED SHOWERS. ALTHOUGH IT IS STILL A FEW DAYS AWAY THE GFS/ENSEMBLE MEMBERS ARE IN GOOD AGREEMENT WITH THE LOW (BOTH SHOW A SMALL SPREAD) PLUS 1″ OF PW WITH UP TO 45 KT OF ISENTROPIC FLOW WILL LIKELY LEAD TO A SUBSTANTIAL VERY LATE-SEASON RAIN EVENT. HPC SHOWS RAINFALL TOTALS THROUGH SATURDAY AFTERNOON OF UP TO 1.5″ FOR THE NORTH BAY MOUNTAINS…CLOSE TO AN INCH AROUND SF BAY…AND 1/2″ OR LESS FOR POINTS FURTHER TO THE SOUTH. THESE VALUES WILL OBVIOUSLY BE ADJUSTED AS THE EVENT NEARS AND COASTAL RANGES FOR MONTEREY AND SANTA CRUZ COUNTIES COULD END UP GETTING A FAIR AMOUNT MORE THAN THESE VALUES.
LOOKED BACK AT OUR PRECIP RECORDS FOR TWO DAY RAINFALL TOTALS FOR THE FIRST HALF OF JUNE AND DATES IN 1964 AND 1967 BOTH JUMP OUT. THIS SETUP HAS SIMILARITIES WITH BOTH OF THOSE AND EVEN HIGHER PW VALUES. ONE OF THEM HAD 500 MB HEIGHTS OF 542 AND ANOTHER HAD THEM DOWN TO 536 DM. IN THIS SITUATION THE LOW IS EXPECTED TO BE AROUND 541.
AFTER THE STORM AT THE END OF THE WEEK…MOSTLY DRY WEATHER IS
FORECAST FOR THE REMAINDER OF NEXT WEEK AS A LARGE RIDGE OF HIGH PRESSURE BUILDS OUT OVER THE PACIFIC. STILL NO SIGN OF A BIG WARM-UP.
==========================================
3 weeks from now, the peak daily theoretical capability for melting and sublimation will be reached. From there, the opportunity will decline daily.
Perusal of the snow pack charts at CDEC shows an interesting trend emerging. The snow melt rate is a lot slower than even the record snow years. The slope looks about 1/2 to 1/3 that of previous years’ for this date.
I wonder what other states’ and provinces’ charts show?
http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/snowapp/swcchart.action