UPDATE: See a new related story here.
From the Moscow Times
The heaviest snowfall in a century brought Moscow and the surrounding region to a near standstill and left hundreds of people without power, officials said Tuesday.
And with snowfall set to continue at least until the end of the week, the authorities are bracing for more chaos on the roads.
“There hasn’t been such a winter in 100 years,” Pyotr Biryukov, deputy mayor for residential issues, said Tuesday in comments carried by Interfax. “The snow this year has already reached one and a half times the climatic norm,” he said.
The capital has seen 216 centimeters of snow fall since the beginning of winter, Biryukov said.
Average snowfall in Moscow is 152 centimeters a year. Biryukov said the city saw 26 centimeters in the 24 hours preceding his Tuesday afternoon news conference and has seen 36 centimeters since the beginning of February.
The heavy snowfall that struck the city Monday quickly led to chaos on the roads. The Yandex Probki traffic monitoring service reached a full 10 points, and on Monday evening it issued the seldom-seen warning that “it’s quicker to walk.”
…
In a similar story here…
The WWF in Russia blames the exceptional winter weather on global warming:
Whether or not Blinkin is right about the tires, City Hall would be well-advised to give the massive snowfall some serious thought. Scientists say such extreme weather is only likely to increase.
“The weather we’ve seen in the past couple of days completely fits with the tendency that was identified a couple of years ago, that we are going to to see much stronger, intensive bursts of precipitation in the future,” said Alexei Kokorin, director of the climate and energy program at WWF Russia. “In the summer, we will probably see stronger bursts of rain.”
===========================================================
Gaia is angry, send more money to Pachauri@wwf.ru
Seriously though, the logic fail here by the WWF spokesman is typical for clueless zealots. If global warming caused this snowfall event, what caused the heavy snow 100 years ago when CO2 levels were below Hansen’s “safe” 350ppm?
Inquiring minds want to know.
UPDATE: The popular warmist theory is that reduced summer sea ice causes the enhanced snow effect, and that sea ice reduction is caused by global warming, but it isn’t cut and dried proof. Then there is the months-long lag problem between reduced sea ice and weather.
From a previous WUWT essay by Willis Eschenbach, I repost this graph. Find the correlation between Arctic sea ice and Snow area.
Figure 2. Arctic sea ice area (blue) and Northern Hemisphere snow area (red). Upper panel shows actual data. Lower panel shows the anomalies of the same data, with the same units (note different scales). The R^2 of the snow and ice anomalies is 0.01, meaninglessly small. The R^2 of the first differences of the anomalies is 0.004, equally insignificant. Neither of these are significantly improved by lags of up to ± 6 months. SNOW DATA ICE DATA
Willis wrote then:
I’m not going to say a whole lot about this graph. It is clear that in general the arctic ice area has been decreasing for twenty years or so. It is equally clear that the northern hemisphere snowfall has not been increasing for the last twenty years. Finally, it is clear that there is no statistical relationship between decreased ice and increased snow.
UPDATE2: Speaking of statistical relationships, here’s a couple.
The graph below plots annual snowfall vs December to April temperature, for all Colorado USHCN stations which have been continuously active since at least 1920.
The Colorado USHCN Stations plotted are:
BOULDER, CANON CITY, CHEESMAN, CHEYENNE WELLS, DEL NORTE 2E, DILLON 1 E, EADS, FT COLLINS, FT MORGAN, FRUITA, GUNNISON 3SW, HERMIT 7 ESE, LAMAR, LAS ANIMAS, MANASSA, MONTROSE #2, ROCKY FORD 2 SE. STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, TRINIDAD, and WRAY
And for those that would say that is too small a sample size, let’s take it up a notch. Below is all USHCN station temperature for December-April in the CONUS versus snowfall.
Here is all USHCN stations annual temperature in the CONUS versus snowfall.
Clearly increased snowfall and decreased temperature correlate. The three graphs above were plotted by Steve Goddard.
Moscow temperatures have been well below average from early December onwards (as in many orther parts of Russia and eastern Europe)
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/global_monitoring/temperature/tn27612_1yr.gif
Steven Mosher says:
February 5, 2013 at 9:40 pm
………..
Sure I can, the loss of ice is predicted to lead to an increased amplitude in the circulation patterns.. confirmed. The increase in amplitude means a lower frequency and higher probablity of blocking patterns. Confirmed. there are a couple papers published on this. reading is fundamental.”
////////////////////////////////
Steven
OK, the loss of ice was predicted in the late 70s/early 80s by those who pushed the AGW meme. However, at what date did they predict that the ice loss would in turn lead to an increase in circulation patterns etc. etc
Please identify the date of this particular prediction, and please reference the paper in which the relevant prediction was made. I would like to see what was said and the reasoning.
Espen says:
February 5, 2013 at 10:33 pm
Anyway, this would be a negative feedback so not good for Cagw theory…
////////////////////////////
Good point, although one would have to properly evaluate solar insolation received as a consequence of albedo changes due to less area of arctic summer ice, verses greater area of winter snowfall (it is area xtent, not volume/quantity that is important)
Steven Mosher says:
February 5, 2013 at 7:40 pm
For me, when the ice fell below the record, my prior was “expect some record snowfall/colder winters in the NH.” Better than a 50/50 bet. Clearly not a sure thing, but clearly not a pure coin toss.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Steven
I have seen you make this type of comment before.
Please identify the date of your “prior” and please provide me with the link to your paper/article in which this “prior” was made/first expressed.
The wind whips up the snow on the surface.
This seems like a rather ridiculous post with un-related graphs cobbed together to attack what is obviously failed science. One of the above graphs shows a negative correlation between temperature and snowfall but the temperatures are all above freezing. Another shows snowfall versus temperature in Colorado when the post is talking about Moscow, which would be affected by open Arctic waters – and certainly not from Dec-April as the ice recovers quickly in the winter as we all know.
The reason Moscow is experiencing more snow is the warmer winter. Normally Moscow gets more Arctic air and it’s too cold to snow. I’ve been there several times. It gets really cold there in February. In Northern Ontario cold winter temperatures have dropped to -20 C. This is well above normal where temps should be falling to -30 to -40 deg C. The NH may be warmer than normal because Arctic air is “stuck” at the pole (I’m guessing here). But it has nothing to do with Colorado.
Doug Proctor says: February 5, 2013 at 9:05 pm
“…What caused the snow 100 years ago?…. Not a legitimate argument against CO2 today: two different causes, some result. Car goes off a cliff, one is bad brakes, the other murder-suicide…..
Not that I believe in CAGW/The IPCC Meme, but a non-argument is a non-argument….”
Doug, I do disagree with you on this.
Here (and repeatedly in the immediate past) we have CAGW proponents commenting on a single extreme but not unprecedented event and explaining that it is a likely result of “global warming” (and in other cases that it is in fact evidence of CAGW) and putting forward possible explanations of a mechanism. This ‘proves’ nothing, and is not evidence of anything.
And the fact that a similar event occurred 100 years ago certainly adds at least some weight to the theory that there may be nothing new happening.
So, to restate your example, what we really have here is:
1. Some time ago we know of a car going off a cliff; cause of accident presumed, but unknown.
2. Then very recently we hear of a second car going off the same cliff; cause of accident not yet fully investigated, but someone holding a particular theory on the matter and who assumes it differs from the previous occasion, has put forward a possible cause/mechanism based upon their theory.
richard verney says:
February 6, 2013 at 4:10 am
Steven Mosher says:
February 5, 2013 at 9:40 pm
………..
Sure I can, the loss of ice is predicted to lead to an increased amplitude in the circulation patterns.. confirmed. The increase in amplitude means a lower frequency and higher probablity of blocking patterns. Confirmed. there are a couple papers published on this. reading is fundamental.”
////////////////////////////////
Steven
OK, the loss of ice was predicted in the late 70s/early 80s by those who pushed the AGW meme. However, at what date did they predict that the ice loss would in turn lead to an increase in circulation patterns etc. etc
Please identify the date of this particular prediction, and please reference the paper in which the relevant prediction was made. I would like to see what was said and the reasoning.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And while you are at it tell us why 2007, the year of the Great Arctic Ice Loss, had less than normal snowfall and this year we have a greater than normal snowfall at the beginning of the winter snowfall season when the open water would have the greatest effect. NH October snowcover and NH winter snowcover
Those charts say CYCLES not CAGW. These chart do not show a greater and greater loss of snow cover. Those charts show 2007 had LESS snow cover not more.
Gail Combs says: February 6, 2013 at 6:49 am
“…And while you are at it tell us why 2007, the year of the Great Arctic Ice Loss, had less than normal snowfall and this year we have a greater than normal snowfall at the beginning of the winter snowfall season when the open water would have the greatest effect….”
Good point indeed. This is the most threadbare of constructs yet.
It is worth noting that at this stage of the season in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011 and 2012 there was a lower arctic sea ice extent than there is now …. but suddenly this year something triggers these happenings? And they leap forward and say “Yep, … lower sea ice area! See? Toldya!…”
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent_L.png
Even if the arctic ocean was wide open, rather than nearly completely frozen over, (as it tends to be this late in the winter,) I don’t see how you can blame the arctic ocean for the moisture turning to snow over Russia. The moisture is coming up from the south, and the arctic ocean is to the north.
Hundreds? Yawn. Call me when it’s hundreds of thousands.
They made a prediction and because their prediction failed they are now curve fitting every natural weather event and calling it dangerous anthropogenic climate change, Where have I seen this happen before?
I’ve made a posting bringing all the data from comments and updates into one:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/06/michael-tobis-has-bupkis/
Thanks!
This is very similar to a response I received on another site, when I said: “Global warming is happening; I can accept that. The planet has warmed and cooled in the past, without any help or hindrance from humans; why is this particular period any different?”
The response: “Because this time humans are doing it. Duh.”
Duh, indeed. That sort of logic just cannot be countered, but you do have to hope that the person who uses it is does not drive and is never in charge of heavy machinery.
.
And the heaviest snow ever has also hit Afghanistan, with up to 3m in places.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7184030.stm
I wonder what this dump of snow will do to the glaciers??
.
izen says:
February 6, 2013 at 2:59 am
More extreme weather from a ‘Lance Armstrong’ climate.
Keep rolling those dice…
ROTFL! The only thing that’s been on steroids is Climate Alarmism. But, reality is bringing it crashing down.
But, keep on guzzling the Klimate Koolaid….
TimTheToolMan says: February 5, 2013 at 5:43 pm
It seems there has been a Sudden Stratospheric Warming event which disrupted the polar vortex and send cold air (normally confined further North) down over Northern Europe.
__________________________________
We had a BBC weatherman explaining this Sudden Stratospheric Warming event – and it is probably true, as it was also cited as the cause of the UK’s terrible 1963 winter.
However, the pathetic little BBC weatherman was so desperate to stress the ‘warming’ bit, just to keep the ‘warming’ meme in the public eye (while were were all stuck in snow-drifts), that he looked like a puppy begging for a bone.
Ahhh, thinking about it, he probably was begging for a bone:
That new Met Office supercomputer was not purchased on the back of surface temperatures that have not warmed in 15 years, that’s for sure….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17100224
And that new Halley Antarctic research station was not purchased on the back of polar bear populations that are spiraling out of control, that’s for sure….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21341044
There is big money to be made in massaging temperature readings and bear population statistics.
.
This possibility has already been covered: in October 2003, U.S. Pentagon released a controversial report, “An abrupt climate change scenario and its implications for United States national security,” that explored how global warming could lead to rapid and catastrophic global cooling. ( U.S. National Research Council, Critical issues in weather modification research (Washington, DC, 2003); Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall. “An abrupt climate change scenario and its implications for United States national security,”)
I suppose that, if you are going to bet big, you had better cover all the angles.
I think people forget the cold winters of the past even in Moscow unless they recall the winters of their youth. Here is a table showing the number of very cold winters [ with annual mean winter temperature of -10 C or lower ] in Moscow per decade.They are now starting to have winters like they had 70-100 years ago as the climate factors that were present then are present now , namely lowest solar activity since 1906 and cooling oceans .Inland areas are typically the first to feel the cold and snow . Canadian Prairies and the north are also this winter seeing colder winter weather and more snow.
1880 [5]
1890 [4]
1900 [4]
1910 [2]
1920 [6]
1930 [2]
1940 [4]
1950 [4]
1960 [4]
1970 [1]
1980 [2]
1990 [0]
2000 [0]
As one can see Moscow has not had several severe winters in a row like they used to get for many decades . Things are about to change. This has little to do with global warming as severe snow and cold winters were the norm when global warming was not even heard of but climate change was recognized as normal climate variablilty
I should mention that the most frequent ENSO signal during the very cold past Moscow winters was NEUTRAL phase being present about 50% of the cold winters . El Nino was present abou 30 % of the cold winters . AO was negative 10 out 11 of the last cold winters since 1950 which is the earliest AO record start. These are the same factors that are often present in cold European winters also ,but they get the moderating effect of the Atlantic Ocean to keep their winters not as cold more often.
OTOH, I have detected a very strong correlation between extreme weather events and claims they have something to do with global warming. These are positively correlated with CO2 so they must be a result of human emissions.
Clearly the only way to control these outbreaks of “extreme claims” is to reduce CO2 emissions. I challenge anyone to find a flaw in this logic.
Well, Talldave2, apparently there a strong correlation between the number of homosexuals in Birmingham and the number of lamp-posts there. Obviously, should you want to increase (or decrease) the numbers of homosexuals in Birmingham, all you need to do is put in more (or remove) lamp-posts. Simples.
Where is the flaw in this logic?
Caleb says:
February 6, 2013 at 7:40 am
Even if the arctic ocean was wide open, rather than nearly completely frozen over, (as it tends to be this late in the winter,) I don’t see how you can blame the arctic ocean for the moisture turning to snow over Russia. The moisture is coming up from the south, and the arctic ocean is to the north.
——————————————–
Agreed!
I asked this over at Judith Curry’s blog in response to her paper investigating ice loss and snow cover. My understanding is that the moisture origin of the snow is Atlantic Maritime air not cold, dry Polar Air. Even after reading Judith’s paper which I think is the source for this idea in the MSM, I don’t understand how this mechanism is supposed to work. Hopefully I’ll get a response to our question.
I do believe that “al qaeda” is to blame. … Oh no it is the Teletubbies, sorry I mixed that one up. One of them has got a lightning rod on his head and this attracts snow, due to more children watching Teletubbies in Moscow this logically attracted more snow to Russia’s capital city! … Of course the teletubbies are also to blame for GW, …. oh no I got that wrong again, it is … farting moose in Canada! They have been eating too much grass, which has grown stronger due to global warming, so now the more they eat the more the grass grows, the more they eat, the more the grass grows, wait … now the question is, what started first moose eating more grass or grass growing more because of gw? This is going to be horrific the world is going to end, in 2012 … oh wait that train has left, … 2014 … I bet the world is going to end in a big fat FART!
There is a major snow storm coming to the US/Canada east coast this week end . What makes for the heavier snow fall? Cold air currently over the east coast due to a negative AO, an Alberta clipper with some snow and a rain entrenched storm coming up from the Gulf of Mexico. Moscow also had a negative AO bringing cold air from the Arctic. Nothing to do with global warming.
Bjorn writes “I have a hard time visualizing temperatures between 20 to 40 °C below zero and up to 33 cm of snowfall in a single day as the ideal sunbathing weather you seem to be trying to impress on the readers here”
I agree. I’m only reporting what Nick Stokes (from my thirds post’s link’s image) has reported. Very strange indeed. Even if you dont agree with Nick’s views on AGW its rare to fault his capability to represent data!