Were Late Season Snowstorms and the Long Cold Winter Caused by Anthropogenic Global Warming or a Cold Northern Polar Region?

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Click the pic to view at source

Image Credit: Remote Sensing Systems (RSS)

By WUWT regular “Just The Facts”

I recommend that everyone watch this brief Weather Channel segment titled “Blame Climate Change for Long Winter“, the video description states that, “In much of the country this winter has stretched well into spring. The Weather Channel meteorologist Julie Martin asks the experts if climate change is to blame.” The Weather Channel segment puts forth the case that the “Long Winter” was caused by “Global Climate Change”, whatever that means. This argument is supported by this Huffington Post article “Climate Change ‘Causing Colder British Winters’ Says Met Office Chief Scientist“.

“Dr Julia Slingo told ITV News global warming may be responsible for the extreme weather.” “It definitely seems like the warming of the arctic is ‘loading the dice’ over cold dry winters.”

“As Britain experienced freezing cold weather and snow, with thousands of homes across the UK without power, the government’s outgoing chief advisor warned last month that climate change will bring greater extremes.

After the coldest March for 50 years, Professor Sir John Beddington said Britain was already experiencing climate change.”

Accuweather also adds support in their piece, “Historic Snowstorm Records; Climate Change to Blame?

“While the debate as to whether climate change is responsible for the rare May snow across the Plains and Upper Midwest continues, there is no question that the snowstorm is historical with numerous records broken.”

“Before this snowstorm, “no station has reported an inch or more of snowfall in Iowa in May since 1967,” stated General Forecaster Jim Lee in a report issued by National Weather Service’s Des Moines Office.

Not only did the 3.1 inches of snow in Omaha break the previous May record of 2.0 inches from 1945, but also marked the city’s first measurable snow in 46 years.

Thursday was only the second time in recorded history that Kansas City, Mo., received measurable snow in May. A total of 0.5 of an inch fell Thursday, while the only other such occurrence was May 3, 1907.”

“For some, the historical aspect of this snowstorm raises the question as to whether climate change is fully or partially responsible.”

However, there are apparently some dissenting opinions who don’t think that Anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change are the cause of Long Cold winters and late winter storms, e.g. in the same AccuWeather article:

AccuWeather.com Expert Senior Meteorologist Bernie Rayno weighed in by saying, “I do not believe this [snowstorm] has anything to do with climate change. It is ridiculous that ‘climate change’ is being blamed for seemingly everything recently.”

As such, let us explore an alternate explanation for this year’s Long Cold Winter and late season snowstorms. RSS Northern Polar Temperature Lower Troposphere (TLT) – Brightness Temperature Anomaly – 1979 to Present;

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Click the pic to view at source

was -0.27° K/C in March, 2013. Note that RSS uses a base period of 1979-1998 (20 years) versus the WMO standard of 1981-2010.

Also in this 3-Year snapshot of RSS Northern Polar Temperature Lower Troposphere (TLT) – Brightness Temperature Anomaly – 1979 to Present;

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Click the pic to view at source

Northern Polar Troposphere Temperature is currently at its lowest point in the last three years.

I will leave it to WUWT’s readers to sort this one out…

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 4, 2013 9:38 pm

Brits obsess with the weather, Americans obsess with weather statistics aka climate. I blame Baseball.

Jimmy Haigh.
May 4, 2013 9:44 pm

“After the coldest March for 50 years, Professor Sir John Beddington said Britain was already experiencing weather.” ”
There. Fixed it.

May 4, 2013 9:49 pm

Er, weren’t the lamestream alarmists making all kinds of noise last year about how the Spring of 2013 was supposed to be exceptionally, scathingly, oppressively hot?
If this is the Gore Effect, might want to see him safely in an orange jumpsuit safely into some federal supermax on solitary confinement and suicide watch.
Without Internet access or even phone privileges.
This guy is simply too dangerous to have him talking to people.

May 4, 2013 9:51 pm

Oops. Redundancy.
With no “edit” function on this site, we’ve all gotta play it safer, don’t we?

May 4, 2013 10:06 pm

In other words, Slingo (sounds like a character out of Clockwork Orange) never looked at the arctic temperature record before blaming the cold European winter on arctic warming. Nigel Farage should call her to answer for this mis-representation before the House of Commons. HAD she looked at the arctic temperature record or hadn’t she? Either way she should be sacked.

Janice Moore
May 4, 2013 10:07 pm

Fish gotta swim,
Birds gotta fly,
Climate change causes weather,
And it will till I die.
Won’t help, blamin’ it on mankind.
More Cult of Climatology fantasy science PROPAGANDA from Climate Rose.

Chad Jessup
May 4, 2013 10:11 pm

There have been some pretty good minds that say look at the pole/equator temperature gradients for a fairly predictable winter forecast.

May 4, 2013 10:21 pm

The Weather Channel segment puts forth the case that the “Long Winter” was caused by “Global Climate Change”, whatever that means.
And were “Long Winter(s)” predicted all along or are they just trying to make excuses after the fact?

Robert L
May 4, 2013 10:42 pm

Boiling oceans and longer winters don’t make a very convincing Story .

May 4, 2013 10:51 pm

[snip -off topic -mod]

May 4, 2013 10:55 pm

Weather Channel should change their name to “Entertainment Channel” with weather forecasting and reporting as a side interest. When I am interested in the nations weather that channel is off with the Coast Guard, fishing or stretching their imagination to come up with another storm name.

May 4, 2013 10:58 pm

@ Alan Rawls. 2206 4 May. Unfortunately, Mr Farage is not a member of the House of Commons, but a member of the European Parliament. The go-to climate realist in the Commons is one of the few scientifically qualified MPs, Peter Lilley, who regularly lacerates the warmists. An example of his work is here:

Rob Ricket
May 4, 2013 11:16 pm

Yet another example the media creating fear, uncertainty and doubt. We climate realists were foolish for failing to hold these scoundrel’s feet to the fire for shifting their mantra from global warming to climate change. Consequently, the unsuspecting public is fed a steady diet of BS regardless of which way the weather swings.
Speaking of FUD, I fear we have lost our way and wonder how much longer the USA will exist as a free nation when our educational system produces endless waves of citizens devoid of independent thought? Of course, I could be completely wrong and some day we will prove that CO2 has the amazing ability to magically warm and cool the planet at once.

Radical Rodent
May 4, 2013 11:27 pm

Accuweather makes an assertion, then promptly sets about proving it wrong. Similar events have happened in history, yet this particular one is obviously different.
As it is an extension of cold weather, it would seem silly to blame global warming (the old bête noir), so let’s fall back on the default position: Climate Change! As if climate doesn’t change. A very quick look back in history will show that climates are always changing; but no: let us ban winter, which is effectively the equivalent of what (western) governments are intent on doing, and if it returns next year – panic! Fall into a paroxysm of self-flagellation and guilt – it is all our fault (or, more specifically, it is all the WHITE MAN’S fault; everybody else is allowed to continue as normal).
It may seem rather off-topic, but this video does explain what could actually be behind the whole charade: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4yOAadmUcU
Please be patient with it; the dull start hides a powerful truth.

Ancient Mariner
May 4, 2013 11:42 pm

You don’t think all this cold and snow is due to Climate Change?
If this really is the beginning of the Next Ice Age, it’s a Climate Change with a vengeance.

May 4, 2013 11:55 pm

The polar regions have been getting colder for a while:
“More Visual Proof Of Global Cooling Since 2007 “

stan stendera
May 5, 2013 12:10 am

We are on the wrong tack here. The agw fanatics are killing people. They have enacted laws in the USA to force the production of bio fuels Human beings in poor countries are dying the slow death of starvation because of those laws. The USA is the breadbasket of the world.
Their enforced building of useless birdchoppers, AKA wind mills, has killed thousands in the UK from energy poverty
Their friends of Rachel Carson movement banned DDT and killed (pick your estimate) 20 to 200 MILLION children in Africa.
These people are not human. Humans care.
How you would feel in a cold room in England as you slowly froze to death. How would you feel in Kenya as you slowly starved to death, and your children joined you. How would you feel in the Congo as you or your children died of malaria, an exceedingly painful death. That is what the greenies do. The evidence is very, very clear.
We must attack the greenies. It is not enough we protest the agw scam. We MUST show what they do and have done.

May 5, 2013 12:14 am

Hmmm, weather is not climate so lets look to the historical record and to the models which predicted the cold winters for Europe and the United States over ten years ago. The IPCC predicted warmer winters while the those looking to correlative data on sunspots and the Dalton and Maunder Minimum as supported by decreasing sunspot intensity and the Livingston and Penn effect predicted colder winters.
I will stick with the models that have been right until now.

John Trigge (in Oz)
May 5, 2013 12:20 am

I find it disturbing that the CAGW crowd can always point to the exact cause of any weather event but never predict one.
Perhaps Dr Slingo should be made to prognosticate on next year’s weather and lose her job if (when?) she is wrong.

May 5, 2013 12:24 am

And who is/was on the side that colder winters had to do with solar forcing and not clinate change? The climate crazies themselves including Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann. This may be Mann’s best paper:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/294/5549/2149.short Solar Forcing of Regional Climate Change During the Maunder Minimum
Real scientists also agree:
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/2/024001 Are cold winters in Europe associated with low solar activity?
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1010667524422 The Late Maunder Minimum (1675–1715) – A Key Period forStudying Decadal Scale Climatic Change in Europe
“Springs were cold and characterized by a southward shift of the mid-latitude storm tracks. Summers in western, central Europe and northern Europe were wetter and slightly cooler than they are today due to a weakerAzores high and a more southerly position of the mean polar front axes. Autumns showed a significantly higher pressure over northern Europe and a lower pressure over continental Europe and the Mediterranean, an indication of an advanced change from summer to winter circulation. It is suggested that the pressure patterns during parts of the LMM might be attributed to the combination of external forcing factors (solar irradiance and volcanic activity) and internal oscillations and couplings in the North Atlantic.”
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/1520-0442%282004%29017%3C0906:TRIOSA%3E2.0.CO;2 The Relative Importance of Solar and Anthropogenic Forcing of Climate Change between the Maunder Minimum and the Present
“1) the Maunder Minimum cooling relative to today was primarily associated with reduced anthropogenic radiative forcing, although the solar reduction added 40% to the overall cooling. There is no obvious distinguishing surface climate pattern between the two forcings”

stan stendera
May 5, 2013 12:26 am

Anthony is not as opposed to my anger at the Greenies as Ithought. Good for him.

Be as upset as you wish, that’s your private matter. Just don’t make extreme comments here – Anthony

Frans Franken
May 5, 2013 12:33 am

The Independent (UK), March 20, 2000:
Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past
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.

May 5, 2013 12:47 am

Now lets go back further to the really old guys who predicted cooling in the 70;s. The coming ice age guys:
http://se-server.ethz.ch/staff/af/fi159/S/Stu021.pdf Solar variability and climate change during the current millenia
Some climate records “demonstrate on the basis of statistical analysis a climate-solar relationship (albeit thirty years put of phase)”
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/203068?uid=3739640&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21101984121713 Climate and the role of the Sun
This is if particular significance as it is a 1980 book chapter by Eddy – the same Eddy some have proposed naming the coming current coming minima after.
“How constant is the sun and how dependent are we on that constancy?”
Finally, the really old guys
“It is true that from the highest point of view the Sun is only one of a multitude – a single star among millions – thousands of which, most likely, exceed him in brightness, magnitude and power. He is only a private in the host of heaven. But he alone, among the countless of myriads, is near enough to affect terrestrial affairs in any sensible degree ; and his influence upon them is such that it is hard to find the word to name it. It is more than mere control and dominance”
– Charles A. Young,1896
It’dsthe sun stupid. Again, 99.97% of energy reaching the planet is from the sun.

May 5, 2013 12:57 am

In my researching of the 1930’s, in some years there were farmers having to replant some cornfields because cold snowmelt means trouble. 1945 was another snowmelt year in the plains. 40° moisture or above is what is needed for seed corn to germinate. Some areas that received snowfall this week were 25-40% planted. So a lot of farmers will be checking to see if germination is taking place. Just like the farmers of the dust bowl did. But now the equipment is so good they can plant the entire crop in two weeks. Looks like some rain next week but better temperatures.???? Hope

May 5, 2013 1:00 am

John Trigge (in Oz) says:
May 5, 2013 at 12:20 am
I find it disturbing that the CAGW crowd can always point to the exact cause of any weather event but never predict one.
Like not being able to predict the snow at Copenhagen and record cold at Cancun – and wasn’t it Slingo who had her flight to Cancun cancelled because of global warming piling up at UK’s airports? I can’t find that particular story again for a link.

May 5, 2013 1:11 am

This 2002 paper is a wealth of info on the guy, the Michael Mann.. It shows he believed the solar influence on climate is real and also shows he did believe in the Little Ice Age and Medieval warm period. Does he believe these now? His hockey stick has forgotten them, in any case.

May 5, 2013 1:21 am

Global warming melted the polar ice in 2012, which caused a colder winter/spring in 2013, which is restoring all the polar ice that melted in 2012. Does that mean global warming is its own cure?

May 5, 2013 2:03 am

“Weather Action TV 26/4/2013 The Mini Ice Age Is Upon Us & Arctic Ice Claims Disproved”

William Astley
May 5, 2013 2:32 am

The interest in climate change in the UK will perk up if we start to experience the cold phase of a Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle. During the cold phase of a D-O cycle the UK will get 10 to 15 feet of snow in the winter. They will also have a cool, wet summer. This will continue for 70 years.
Arctic surface sea ice will of course also recover. If so, we will have an opportunity to decide which is preferred global warming or global cooling.
Greenland ice temperature, last 11,000 years determined from ice core analysis, Richard Alley’s paper.
The ‘skeptics’ have been trying to tell the ‘warmists’ that the sun (based on analysis of cosmgenic isotope changes not Lief’s sunspot counts) was at its highest magnetic cycle activity in 8000 years during the latter half of the 20th century (i.e In the warm phase of a D-O cycle). This is important as it appears see below for details that the solar magnetic cycle modulates the amount of planetary cloud cover in higher latitude regions over the ocean and it appears changes to planetary cloud cover caused a significant portion of the late 20th century warming.
Nir Shaviv estimated (see paper link below) that 0.5 C or roughly 75% of the 20th century warming has caused by the solar magnetic cycle changes.
As it appears the solar magnetic cycle has been interrupted, the 75% portion of the warming will be removed and the planet will return to temperatures of the Little ice age.
The mechanism that changes planetary cloud cover, cloud lifetime, and cloud albedo is driven by changes to ion production in the atmosphere and changes to the global electric current (movement of electric charge from the poles and from the top of clouds), both of which are modulate by the solar magnetic cycle.
Based on the paleoclimatic record there is a 10 to 12 year delay in the cooling when the solar magnetic cycle starts to slow down. The delay is not due to thermal lag of the oceans. The cloud cover increase is delayed by 10 to 12 years. The reason for this delay is fundamental to explaining why there are observed cyclic geomagnetic field changes that correlate with the cyclic solar magnetic cycle interruptions.
Persistent Solar Influence on North Atlantic Climate During the Holocene (William: Holocene is the name for this interglacial period)
Surface winds and surface ocean hydrography in the subpolar North Atlantic appear to have been influence by variations in the solar output (William: The correct mechanism as to how the sun affects North Atlantic climate is not changes in total solar irradiation, the sun does not get significantly hot or colder. The mechanism is changes to low level cloud cover, cirrus cloud cover, and changes to the jet stream. See Tinsley and Yu’s review paper.). The evidence comes from a close correlation between inferred changes in production of the cosmogenic nuclides carbon-14 and beryllium – 10 and centennial to millennial time scale changes in proxies of drift ice measured in deep-sea sediment cores. (Changes to cosmogenic isotopes occurs when there is a change to solar magnetic cycle and/or a sudden change to the geomagnetic field). A solar forcing mechanism thereby may underlie at least the Holocence segment of the North Atlantic “1500-year” cycle.
Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years
Direct observations of sunspot numbers are available for the past four centuries1,2, but longer time series are required, for example, for the identification of a possible solar influence on climate and for testing models of the solar dynamo. Here we report a reconstruction of the sunspot number covering the past 11,400 years, based on dendrochronologically dated radiocarbon concentrations. We combine physics-based models for each of the processes connecting the radiocarbon concentration with sunspot number. According to our reconstruction, the level of solar activity during the past 70 years is exceptional, and the previous period of equally high activity occurred more than 8,000 years ago. We find that during the past 11,400 years the Sun spent only of the order of 10% of the time at a similarly high level of magnetic activity and almost all of the earlier high-activity periods were shorter than the present episode. Although the rarity of the current episode of high average sunspot numbers may indicate that the Sun has contributed to the unusual climate change during the twentieth century, we point out that solar variability is unlikely to have been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three decades3. (William: The authors note that total solar irradiation (TSI) changes did not cause the late 20th century warming. That statement is correct. However, the solar magnetic cycle changes modulate planetary cloud cover. The change in planetary cloud cover caused roughly 75% of the late 20th century warming. Solar cycle 24 is an interruption to the solar magnetic cycle. The planet will now significantly cool.)
A Pervasive Millennial-Scale Cycle in North Atlantic Holocene and Glacial Climates by Gerard Bond, William Showers, Maziet Cheseby, Rusty Lotti, Peter Almasi, Peter deMenocal, Paul Priore, Heidi Cullen, Irka Hajdas, Georges Bonani
Evidence from North Atlantic deep sea cores reveals that abrupt shifts punctuated what is conventionally thought to have been a relatively stable Holocene climate. During each of these episodes, cool, ice-bearing waters from north of Iceland were advected as far south as the latitude of Britain. At about the same times, the atmospheric circulation above Greenland changed abruptly. Pacings of the Holocene events and of abrupt climate shifts during the last glaciation are statistically the same; together, they make up a series of climate shifts with a cyclicity close to 1470 plus/minus 500 years (William: Plus/minus in the case of the Bond cycle is 950 years, 1470 years, and 1950 year cycles). The Holocene events, therefore, appear to be the most recent manifestation of a pervasive millennial-scale climate cycle operating independently of the glacial-interglacial climate state. Amplification of the cycle during the last glaciation may have been linked to the North Atlantic’s thermohaline circulation.
The North Atlantic’s 1-2 kyr Climate Rhythm: Relation to Heinrich Events, Dansgaard-Oeschger Cycles and the Little Ice Age Gerald Bond et al.
“New evidence from deep-sea sediment cores in the subpolar North Atlantic demonstrates that a significant component of sub-Milankovitch climate variability occurs in distinct 1-2 kyr cycles (William: This cycles are called Bond cycles which includes the Dansgaard-Oeschger Cycle and the more sever Heinrich event. The solar magnetic cycle changes cause the D-O cycle and the more sever Heinrich event.)
On climate response to changes in the cosmic ray flux and radiative budget
“…Moreover, l was mostly obtained through comparison of climate states notably different from each other, and thus only describes an average sensitivity. Subject to the above caveats and those described in the text, the CRF/climate link therefore implies that the increased solar luminosity and reduced CRF over the previous century should have contributed a warming of 0.47 ± 0.19 Celsius, while the rest should be mainly attributed to anthropogenic causes. Without any effect of cosmic rays, the increase in solar luminosity would correspond to an increased temperature of 0.16 ± 0.04 Celsius. …”
This review paper explains the mechanisms.
Atmospheric Ionization and Clouds as Links Between Solar Activity and Climate
Observations of changes in cloud properties that correlate with the 11-year cycles in space particle fluxes are reviewed. The correlations can be understood in terms of one or both of two microphysical processes; ion mediated nucleation (IMN) and electroscavenging. IMN relies on the presence of ions to provide the condensation sites for sulfuric acid and water vapors to produce new aerosol particles, which, under certain conditions, might grow into sizes that can be activated as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN). Electroscavenging depends on the buildup of space charge at the tops and bottoms of clouds as the vertical current density (Jz) in the global electric circuit encounters the increased electrical resistivity of the clouds. Space charge is electrostatic charge density due to a difference between the concentrations of positive and negative ions. Calculations indicate that this electrostatic charge on aerosol particles can enhance the rate at which they are scavenged by cloud droplets. The aerosol particles for which scavenging is important are those that act as insitu ice forming nuclei (IFN) and CCN. Both IMN and electroscavenging depend on the presence of atmospheric ions that are generated, in regions of the atmosphere relevant for effects on clouds, by galactic cosmic rays (GCR). The space charge depends, in addition, on the magnitude of Jz. The magnitude of Jz depends not only on the GCR flux, but also on the fluxes of MeV electrons from the radiation belts, and the ionospheric potentials generated by the solar wind, that can vary independently of the GCR flux. The roles of GCR and Jz in cloud processes are the speculative links in a series connecting solar activity, the solar wind, GCR, clouds and climate. This article reviews the correlated cloud variations and the two mechanisms proposed as possible explanations for these links.

May 5, 2013 2:57 am

Prof. Beddington has made a habit of the alarmist soundbite based on heresay not knowledge. His expertise is not climatology but something in Biology.

May 5, 2013 3:57 am

They long ago left behind the idea that weather is not climate , now people like Slingo will willing jump on anything has ‘proof ‘ of climate doom. And yet oddly they claim their science is nothing but stronger and the issue even more ‘settled’ has they reach desperately for anything to keep the AGW train moving.

P Wilson
May 5, 2013 4:20 am

Didn’t they the MET Office once say, only a few years ago, that with the warming of the arctic, the trend to mild winters will continue, and that snow would be a thing on the past, only to be seen on the internet?

May 5, 2013 4:30 am


May 5, 2013 4:40 am

RE: Goode ’nuff says:
May 5, 2013 at 12:57 am
Good points. If you want to hit Alarmists where it hurts, hit them with history.
Over and over you will hear claims along the lines of, “Worst since 1964” or “Worst in thirty years.” My automatic response is to ask, “What happened in 1964?” or “What happened thirty-one years ago?”
Again and again they land themselves in a quagmire of having to explain why the same sort of extreme happened ten of thirty or a hundred or a thousand years ago, and why it wasn’t Global Warming that time, but is Global Warming this time.
All they can do is attempt to erase the past, (which makes them look bad when they get caught,) or come up with rather cross-eyed explanations, (for example, Mann’s attempt to erase the Medieval Warm Period, by creating a model that “balances out” the warmth in Greenland with extreme cold in Central Asia…a model which then must go down in flames when actual physical data, gathered by scientists in China, shows it was actually warmer in Central Asia at that time.)
History makes them squirm. If they say the past winter’s snow was caused by “unprecedented melt in the arctic,” history then asks them to explain why as similar weather pattern sixty years in the past was NOT caused by “unprecedented melt in the Arctic.” They can’t do it. All they can go is smile a brown smile.

May 5, 2013 4:43 am

Excuse me. Correction to concluding sentence: “All they can do is smile a brown smile.” (Not even spell-check can catch that blunder.)

May 5, 2013 4:50 am

I have a copy of Mann’s model’s silly map, which erases the Medevial Warm Period, (plus good links to CO2 Science and No Tricks Zone,) at http://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/be-concerned-about-cooling-not-global-warming/

Doug Huffman
May 5, 2013 5:35 am

Eschew television, for its narrative fallacy (suspension of disbelief) is the witch doctor’s mind-killer.
Eschew forecasters without doxastic commitment.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
May 5, 2013 6:02 am

From Brad on May 5, 2013 at 12:14 am:

I will stick with the models that have been right until now.

Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful.
– Box, G. E. P., and Draper, N. R., (1987), Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, pg 424. (Ref)

Bill Illis
May 5, 2013 6:24 am

They used to be very sure that global warming was causing the jet streams to move closer to the poles (which would make the winters milder). They even calculated they were moving toward the poles at 12.5 miles per year and the move toward the poles was widely quoted.
And now using the exact same dataset, they find that Arctic warming has made the jet streams more wavy with more blocking systems leading to colder mid-latitude winters.
Maybe one is right. Maybe both are wrong.

May 5, 2013 6:40 am

I live in West Norway and here it has been a cold May so far with freak snowfalls. The lake outside my window is still full of ice. Last Friday they had heavy snow in Bergen.
A few days ago I happen to saw on TV a show of what happened in Norway during the Napoleon Wars. Which was during the Dalton Minimum. Norway which then belonged to Denmark was dragged into a Gunboat War with Brittan which made a sea blockade against Danish ports. Kristansand in southern Norway then became a heaven for state sponsored pirates.
Those same years saw sever cold winters and late spring. This causeed malnutrition and famine. History repeat itself at least when it comes to the weather.

John Phillips
May 5, 2013 7:23 am

Snow re-enforces colder temperatures. It reflects more of the sun’s radiation and is a better radiator at night than bare ground. So if the climate so-called scientists want to claim more snow and longer springs are a result of global warming, they should also admit that it results in negative feedback, reducing the sensitivity of global average temperature to CO2 concentrations. They can’t have it both ways. Well, I guess they can, but not without ridicule.

May 5, 2013 7:45 am

All of this can be fixed if the Tribe will just throw all of their gold into the Volcano, Then the Earth Gods will be appeased.
The High Priests will have to get their cut, of course. But the Holy Men who talk to the Gods for us deserve no less, right?

May 5, 2013 7:48 am
Eve Stevens
May 5, 2013 8:01 am

Stan, I agree. The death toll from the greenies, including the banning of DDT, has now surpassed Stalin’s death toll. Nobody seems to care. 2,000 UK citizens died in the first two weeks of March, from cold. The UK government doesn’t care. I am sure significant numbers die in Europe but I have not seen a total. None of this makes the news. People who cannot afford heat any longer please call your local news station. Let’s start making some noise.

G P Hanner
May 5, 2013 8:04 am

“Not only did the 3.1 inches of snow in Omaha break the previous May record of 2.0 inches from 1945, but also marked the city’s first measurable snow in 46 years.”
Accuweather should have added the caveat on that date.
Not only that. For that snow event, Omaha may have gotten 3+ inches of snow, but just a few miles south, where I live, the snow didn’t even cover the grass and was gone within hours.
And I can recall a major snow event for the entire eastern Nebraska area in 1987. That occurred in late April and quaified as a major winter snowstorm with high winds and snow accumulatons in excess of 6 inches. It lasted over 24 hours before moving out of the area. Being a Spring snowstorm it melted quickly.

May 5, 2013 8:16 am

“Dr Julia Slingo told ITV News global warming may be responsible for the extreme weather.” “It definitely seems like the warming of the arctic is ‘loading the dice’ over cold dry winters.”

Oh really. Let;’s look at the Central England Temperature. Look at the graph, can you see a trend to colder winters? This past winter was 187th coldest in 354 years.

May 5, 2013 8:32 am

The only dice that’s loaded and rattling is in Julia Slingbat’s head.

Met Office 18 June 2009
The UK Climate Projections 2009 (UKCP09) confirm that the UK is likely to see hotter, drier summers and warmer, wetter winters…………
Met Office Chief Scientist, Julia Slingo, said: “Through UKCP09 the Met Office has provided the world’s most comprehensive regional climate projections with a unique assessment of the possible changes to our climate through the rest of this century.

May 5, 2013 8:42 am

For anyone interested here are some past predictions of warmer, less snowy winters and milder springs.in quotes from scientists over the years. Now they move the goalposts. If we return to a run of milder winters during low Arctic sea ice extent in summers will they still be right? What a bloody joke.

May 5, 2013 8:57 am

Just The Facts,
Please note also that the Met Office this April said that the Arctic was not to blame for the harsh winter. They need to get their act together. Julia Slingbat needs to shut up, investigate things first they make pronouncements.

Met Office
“This hypothesis remains contentious [9], however, and there is little evidence from the comparison between the cold spring of 1962 and this year that the Arctic has been a contributory factor in terms of the hypothesis proposed above. Figure 13 shows the midtroposphere temperature anomalies for 1962 and 2013; over the Arctic they are almost identical and reflect the negative NAO pattern. It is hard to argue that Arctic amplification had changed the equator to pole temperature in a systematic way to affect the circulation this spring.”


May 5, 2013 9:07 am

Eve Stevens says:
May 5, 2013 at 8:01 am
“People who cannot afford heat any longer please call your local news station. Let’s start making some noise.”
Guess what Trittin, leader of the German Greens, inventor of the German FIT tariff back in 1999 when he was in a government coaition has to say about exploding energy prices in Germany? Well, he blames the current “conservative” coalition for it.
Unfortunately for him people DO remember who invented the subsidy scam.

john robertson
May 5, 2013 10:08 am

In the spirit of hysteria over weather, I will pretend we are all going to freeze/starve due to an inactive sun.
Then introduce Sun Worship and the need for heretic/witches to be sacrificed, by firing them into the sun.
Enough additional matter should “stoke” the furnaces of the sun and save our society.
Identify all the CAGW cliche as the witches and we have a retribution and scapegoating scheme worthy of our ancestors.(Technically “deniers” of the Sun’s power)
And of course using this impeccable logic (IPCC TM), when no effect is noticeable, we can only respond by firing even more of the self identified group, into the sun.
Sick I know, but consistent with human nature and provides a “proof” that the social justice, enviro-nutz and doom by co2 people are actually good for something.
Now I do offer this sarcasm tongue in cheek, but I too have a need for retribution upon the fools who have debased science, squandered public wealth and abandoned reason.
Far too many of these loons will retire, rewarded with public pensions and escape fitting punishment for the harm they have created.
For the damage has been enormous, if one had maliciously planned to destroy the poor, what more effective tools could they have chosen?

May 5, 2013 10:24 am

Bill Illis says:
May 5, 2013 at 6:24 am
Good catch.
The AGW theorists clearly caught making mutually incompatible claims as regards jet stream shifts which is a point I have been making for several years.
If, however, one proposes stratospheric cooling when the sun is more active and stratospheric warming when it is less active then everything falls into place.
That, however is the opposite of the conventional wisdom as I have pointed out many times before both here and elsewhere.
The established view of the sign of the solar effect on temperatures in mesosphere and stratosphere must be wrong otherwise we cannot account for recent observations or the climate zone and jet stream shifts observed in LIA and MWP.
An active sun must cool the stratosphere in order to induce poleward shifting as observed in the MWP and recent warm period.
The observed change in temperature trend in the stratosphere around 2000 with subsequent changes in jet stream behaviour favours solar rather than CO2 causation.

Luther Wu
May 5, 2013 10:46 am

Oh. Now I get it… warm makes cold.
Just think how much money I can save this summer by not running the air conditioning.

May 5, 2013 10:54 am

One of the problems is that terms like “Global Warming”, “Global Climate Change”, “Anthropogenic Global warming” are used by media interchangeably. We should not fall into that trap oourselves.
Few of us with any sense of geology will deny the existence of Climate Change.
Many of us will even agree that we are actually living in a period of major changes in climate.
These changes have little or nothing to do with carbon dioxide, but are due to major happenings in our solar system (both of a gravity and a magnetic nature), which have a number of reputable solar physicists declare that we are entering a Grand Minimum, with comparisons to the Dalton or even the Maunder. These signs are reflected in several earthly manifestations, mostly in the oceans.
Look to Leroux’ Mobile Polar Highs for the Arctic outbursts that we have been witnessing. The MPH is strong and is sending its fingers to the lower attitudes, taking advantage of the patterns of Rossby waves. As a result, sliding under the Hadley cell’s warm air, it contorts the Jet Stream pattern and creates so-called “blocking highs” that keeps these outbreaks (or for that matter the Russian/Pakistan summer hot trend a couple of years ago) in place longer than usual.
Now, I know this is not proof. I am a geologist, not a meteorologist. But the subject matter of sun/earth interaction is one that attracts little research funding and that too few researchers are pursuing.
Finally, those in the advocacy field should concentrate on the alternative of a CO2-ruled climate change , accept climate change as it is, i.e. natural cooling as well as warming, and propagate the need for society to prepare for the consequences of a prolonged cooling spell, with all its hazards of food supply and living conditions.
Seriously, It’s the sun.

May 5, 2013 11:01 am

Not much question that climate change is associated with changes in the climate.
But it is remarkable that so many consider this deeply meaningful somehow.

Laurence Clark Crossen
May 5, 2013 11:05 am

@Chad Jessup says:
May 4, 2013 at 10:11 pm
There have been some pretty good minds that say look at the pole/equator temperature gradients for a fairly predictable winter forecast.
Colder climate causes longer winters. Warmer climate causes longer summers. The colder the earth the steeper the gradient and vice-a-versa.

Joseph Bastardi
May 5, 2013 11:12 am

When you are right its a reason, when wrong an excuse
If I may suggest a post I did recently
There is no end in site. Its not unlike watching the knight guarding the bridge in The Search for the Holy Grail.. one limb after another gets chopped off and he thinks he’s winning

May 5, 2013 11:20 am

“The colder the earth the steeper the gradient and vice-a-versa.”
Not so simple.
Both warming from the equatorial surface and cooling above the tropopause will increase the gradient.
Both cooling from the equatorial surface and warming above the tropopause will decrease the gradient.
The change in the gradient in response to any cause is actually a negative system response seeking to cancel out the forcing element that caused the change in gradient.
That change in gradient alters the latitudinal position of the climate zones and jet streams so as to change the rate of throughput of energy.
The effect is to maintain top of atmosphere radiative balance over time thereby preserving the system energy content which is set only by atmospheric mass, the strength of the gravitational field and the intensity of insolation.
The radiative characteristics of constituent molecules cannot influence system energy content, merely the sizes positions and intensities of the permanent climate zones and compared to natural influences from solar and oceanic variability radiative characteristics count for nothing.

May 5, 2013 11:56 am

It was Vicky Pope head of climate predictions whose flight to Cancun was cancelled from global warming piled up at Gatwick:
“Snow irony
Vicky Pope, head of the climate predictions programme at the Met Office’s Hadley Centre, was stuck at Gatwick airport this week, a victim of Britain’s brutal cold snap. Ironically, she was on her way to Cancún to announce, together with the UN’s World Meteorological Organisation, that 2010 had provisionally tied with 1998 as the hottest year on record. Scientists from the Noaaa and Nasa, the two other institutes that provide data on global temperatures were wisely staying put in the US, having already stated that it looked like being the hottest year ever.”

Laurence Clark Crossen
May 5, 2013 12:08 pm

Stephen Wilde says:
May 5, 2013 at 11:20 am
“The colder the earth the steeper the gradient and vice-a-versa.”
Not so simple.
That is very interesting, but isn’t that shorter term and therefore weather rather than climate? Within a year will not all that balance out? I am sure it will as heat transport, the main driver of the weather, is very efficient in maintaining the gradient.

Theo Goodwin
May 5, 2013 12:36 pm

Goode ’nuff says:
May 5, 2013 at 12:57 am
Very interesting, thanks. May I suggest that when you post you remind everyone what part of the country you are talking about.

Theo Goodwin
May 5, 2013 12:43 pm

Albert Jacobs says:
May 5, 2013 at 10:54 am
“One of the problems is that terms like “Global Warming”, “Global Climate Change”, “Anthropogenic Global warming” are used by media interchangeably.”
Another problem is that all television talking heads continue to benefit from the “airhead assumption” for news readers that has long prevailed. None of them get criticism for the shallowness of their knowledge of climate science and their willingness to say things that they do not understand in the least. Some of them get criticism for their willingness to spout a party line but most do not. The citizens of the USA have the power to change this deplorable situation through our individual actions. Call them out.

May 5, 2013 12:56 pm

Laurence Clark Crossen said:
“That is very interesting, but isn’t that shorter term and therefore weather rather than climate? Within a year will not all that balance out? I am sure it will as heat transport, the main driver of the weather, is very efficient in maintaining the gradient”
Indeed, non radiative heat transport, the main driver of the weather, is very efficient at maintaining the gradient.
That is my point.
On longer term time scales than seasonal variability many factors seek to disturb the gradient set by mass, gravity and insolation. One of those factors is the radiative characteristics of constituent molecules such as CO2.
Whatever the disruptive influence (other than mass, gravity or insolation) the gradient is maintained over time.
Weather and climate change (shifting climate zones and jets) is the negative system response in action.
We can see from MWP and LIA that the natural solar and ocean induced variations are very large, about 1000 miles latitudinally. Our CO2 might contribute a mile or so.

Tom in Indy
May 5, 2013 1:07 pm

Doesn’t their claim of longer winters support the argument that the earth has a natural response to global warming? (Man-made warming or natural warming doesn’t matter to the earth.)
Longer winters following a period of warmer than average climate, seems like a natural negative feedback. What am I missing?

May 5, 2013 1:50 pm

I don’t know if anyone noticed that the AO has been negative for 6 months with lowest March reading since 1950 of -2.535 and the lowest single reading of -5.5 . This is sure to bring a lot of cold Arctic air south . Add to this the lowest solar sunspot readings since 1900, cooling global SST, more frequent and bigger sudden stratospheric warming which can bring even more cold air south from the Arctic ,no El Ninos and the land covered with 4th highest snow levels on record . All this has very liitle to do with climate change caused by global warming caused by man but everything to do with natural climate cycles that would change whether man was on this planet or not. and which periodically change in magnitude and frequency

May 5, 2013 2:00 pm

I am going to correct myself . This past March had the second lowest AO reading of -2.535. The March of 1962 had a slightly lower level of -2.848.

May 5, 2013 2:50 pm

Let me get this straight –
The overheated atmosphere causes the ice to melt excessively. Everyone knows that ice has to absorb energy to melt and this cools the overheated atmosphere resulting in a cold winter while the melted ice is rapidly re-freezing releasing heat to the cold atmosphere causing – er – warming ?
Yeah – that makes sense !

William Astley
May 5, 2013 3:12 pm

In reply to;
Joseph Bastardi says:
May 5, 2013 at 11:12 am
When you are right its a reason, when wrong an excuse
If I may suggest a post I did recently
There is no end in site. Its not unlike watching the knight guarding the bridge in The Search for the Holy Grail.. one limb after another gets chopped off and he thinks he’s winning
Best wishes Joe,
I concur with your comments. Thank-you for articles here and elsewhere. I hope things are going well for you.
I have been busy working away to solve the details of the forcing mechanisms that cause the Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles, the Heinrich events, and the glacial/interglacial cycles. I have made significant progress although there are a few issues particularly timing of the phases that I am unsure of.
The current solar observations strongly point to the start of the cooling phase of either a Dansgaard-Oeschger cycle or possibly and likely to a Heinrich event. If there are signs of Dansgaard-Oeschger cooling, there should be business opportunities as the climate change problem will be significant global cooling.
There are periods of millions of years when planetary temperature does not correlate with atmospheric CO2 levels. There have been a series of papers that have been written to attempt redact the evidence.
It appears the greenhouse gas warming mechanisms saturate. Part of the solution to the anomaly is the Lindzen and Choi’s finding that clouds in the tropics resist forcing changes by reflecting more or less sunlight off into space. I suspect that there is however something else that has been missed.

Sam Yates
May 5, 2013 3:20 pm

Tom in Indy: I don’t think you’re missing anything; increased snowfall in Canada and Siberia as a result of increased moisture availability, and consequently a larger snowpack at the end of winter, is a very definite negative feedback.
More on topic, I’m not sure I follow the point of the original post. I mean, to me it reads as something along the lines of “cold northern hemisphere weather was caused by cold northern hemisphere weather.” Fair enough, but why the frigidity? What was the cause of the low tropospheric temperatures from 60˚ to 82.5˚ N?

Svend Ferdinandsen
May 5, 2013 3:28 pm

They got it wrong. The long and cold winter could mean some climate change, because to change the climate you need first to change the weather.
I expect still that “climate change” means what it says, that climate changes and in any direction.

May 5, 2013 5:31 pm

This is actually great news because a key part of the process of demise of the settled science is absurdity and over reach. It loses elections and it loses political science of global warming.

May 5, 2013 6:43 pm

Joseph Bastardi says:
May 5, 2013 at 11:12 am
Nice job Mr. B! Well worth linking again.
Succinct and poignant. Just like the conversation should be with respect to science.
What a great interview/online discussion to have on WUWT TV Anthony.
Just sayin>

Ulric Lyons
May 5, 2013 6:44 pm

“Were Late Season Snowstorms and the Long Cold Winter Caused by Anthropogenic Global Warming or a Cold Northern Polar Region?”
The question is why the AO went so negative in March. And if the short term solar signal is responsible, there will be no internal forcing mechanism to be found.

May 5, 2013 7:18 pm

Ulric Lyons says:
May 5, 2013 at 6:44 pm
“Were Late Season Snowstorms and the Long Cold Winter Caused by Anthropogenic Global Warming or a Cold Northern Polar Region?”
The question is why the AO went so negative in March. And if the short term solar signal is responsible, there will be no internal forcing mechanism to be found.
The question would actually be,,,,, what is the timing of the Forcing/Feedback of a major injection of fresh water into the North Atlantic due to a week long cyclonic event directly over the North Pole in early August of last year that transported a huge amount of Arctic Ice to their melting point, no?
Is that science settled ?

george e. smith
May 5, 2013 8:24 pm

Well I can’t see any connection between the squiggly line which is presumably data in Microwave Sounding Units; whatever they are, and past time since 1979, which seems to be one standard climate time interval, and the regular staircase line superimposed on top of that.
It seems to my quite untrained eye, that the Microwave sounding units stay pretty much level from 1979 to 1995, It then suddenly kicks up to a new level by about 1997-8 and stays there till about 20002 and another slight jog to a level that it has stayed at ever since.
I presume TLT refers to the tilt of the unexplained staircase plot.
It would be nice if people spoke in complete sentences, and use standard SI units for their data plots, so we have some idea what they are talking about.

Sam Yates
May 5, 2013 8:29 pm

Many thanks for responding! In the interest of full disclosure, I, uh, should probably clarify that I AM a “warmist” (just getting that out there now, before anyone gets the impression that I’m trying to sneak about here with a false wig and beard), and have wondered whether this is a manifestation of the sort of phenomenon that Dr. Jennifer Francis has proposed, and can be connected to the record low sea ice last winter (I’m sure you’ve had a variety of aggressive folks yammering at you about that before, so I won’t trouble your ears with yet more yammering). On the other hand, the strong negative excursion of the AO happened awfully late in the season for that mechanism to have been responsible, so I have to say that I half-suspect that you’re basically right here. Sometimes these things do just happen, and sometimes (most of the time, actually) the weather twists itself into knots for no climatologically significant reason.

May 5, 2013 8:50 pm

I agree with Stan Stendera – AGW alarmism is already killing thousands and making millions suffer unspeakably – and I myself can’t just sit idly by while these mass murderers keep going on their rampage. This is not an extreme statement – it is factual, and there is plenty of empirical data to support it.

May 6, 2013 3:45 am

Joseph Bastardi says: May 5, 2013 at 11:12 am
I fear the Black Climate Knights are in league with the Knights who say Nit, such is the movement of goal posts.
wws on May 5, 2013 at 7:45 am All of this can be fixed if the Tribe will just throw all of their gold into the Volcano, Then the Earth Gods will be appeased.The High Priests will have to get their cut, of course. But the Holy Men who talk to the Gods for us deserve no less, right?
Whilst your logic is to be praised I must correct you.
Gold must be hoarded not smelted in Hekla/Katla etc but can be accepted as payment for ‘presentations’ and to fund the jetsetting to spread the word so more people lie awake at night fearing the climate apocalypse. A tithe is an acceptable penance (paid in gold) however, and this is the fatal flaw in your logic, Volcano Gods are only appeased by human sacrifice. Therefore to avert the end of times we must throw unbelievers into the lava pits.

May 6, 2013 5:32 am

Myrrh on May 5th 2013 at 1:00
Global Warming piling up at the airport stopping flights. I love that, its brilliant. “Hey look at all of that lovely global warming covering that mountain” “Hey kids lets make a globalwarming man in the backyard” Globalwarming is my new word for snow, Thanks Im using that from now on thats it.

Ed Zuiderwijk
May 6, 2013 5:51 am

Asking the question (in the title) is answering it. Just apply Occam’s rule.

May 6, 2013 7:37 am

I’m just waiting for the headline which reads “Abnormally long stretch of average temperatures and weather blamed on climate change.” They already have climate change as a suspect for both colder than normal and warmer than normal — why not average as well?

Frank K.
May 6, 2013 8:31 am

Why does anyone still watch the Weather Channel?? After they started their infantile storm naming practice, I quit using them as a reliable source of weather information (along with the awful “Weather Underground,” which I discarded a long time ago).

May 6, 2013 9:03 am

Funny… changed from Global Warming to Climate Change.. of course the climate always changes over time. WTF, what a Load of Crap blaming warmer than average artic temperatures (There still cold up north) when we get cold weather down south.

Arno Arrak
May 6, 2013 9:16 am

Interesting polar temperature graphs. The first one shows steady long term warming from 1979 on. This means that the Arctic today is the only part of the world still warming. And no thanks to the greenhouse effect which Ferenc Miskolczi has proved to be non-existent. What is warming the Arctic now is not any anthropogenic carbon dioxide cloud but warm currents of the Atlantic Ocean. As I proved in my peer reviewed paper on the Arctic, It all started with a change in the North Atlantic current system at the turn of the twentieth century. Arctic temperature prior to this was two thousand years of slow cooling. The warming started at the turn of the century, paused for thirty years from 1940 to 1970, then resumed, and is apparently still going strong to judge by the RSS data in your graph. There are numerous observations of this warming from the twenties to the 2000s. Direct measurements in 2010 by Spielhagen et al. determined that water temperature reaching the Arctic then was the highest in 2000 years of Arctic history. The source of this warmth can be nothing but warm Gulf Stream water carried north by currents. The interruption of warming in mid-century very likely was caused by return of the previous flow pattern of ocean currents. But something that has happened before can happen again. Your second figure shows a recent slowdown of this warming and even a hint of a downward trend. Could this be the start of another interruption of warming like the one from 1940 to 1970? I don’t know, but the situation in the Arctic should be closely monitored because of all the plans that depend on the continuation of Arctic warming. It is important to note that the slowdown in mid-century was not just a slowdown but an actual cooling at the rate of 0.3 degrees per decade. If it happened again today it could have a strong inhibitory effect on Arctic trade and exploitation of resources that Arctic nations are looking forward to.

May 6, 2013 9:24 am

Watching the Weather Channel is like watching MSNBC. If I wanted to watch the news I’d switch to the “news” (programming) channels or the internet. The Weather Channel in the distant past, actually did a great job reporting the Nation’s weather. Now they are pretty much doing everything but the weather. They should change their name to the “hype channel” since they drum up every storm like its a catastrophe!

James at 48
May 6, 2013 10:43 am

And the great Valley Fever outbreak is caused by the drought (true) which is caused by Global Warming (false) as opposed to the dreaded La Nina / Neutral – Negative PDO combination.

Chris R.
May 6, 2013 12:24 pm

To justthefactswuwt:
You wrote: “Yes, there is a big difference between the large uncertainties contained within the April 2013 Met Office report you state, that has Julia Slingo’s name on it….and this April 11th ITV News interview with Julia…”
You’re right, we have here a tremendous example of the “Stephen Schneider” type of
misleading comments. He recommended this form of selective distortion in a 1989 interview
with Discover magazine:

On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change….So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.

Met Office report: scientific method. ITV interview: simplified, dramatic statement.

Ulric Lyons
May 6, 2013 4:38 pm

“the weather twists itself into knots for no climatologically significant reason”
Having made a solar based forecast for at least three weeks very cold conditions through this March, I don’t think the weather does that to itself.

May 7, 2013 3:58 pm

While climate science is kept hopping around chasing the link between CO2 and man made global warming signals . Man (GOD) has been playing around with man made climate change before they signed this http://www.scribd.com/doc/3436120/UN-1976-Weather-Weapon-Treaty The one thing they didn’t state was that it can’t be used on their own people But what we know is if we create a change in the atmosphere above us now there will be a change in the atmosphere to the west some hours later Your heard the saying Red sky at dawn sailor be warned, Red sky at night sailors delight They found out all they needed to do here http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/31/64/49/PDF/angeo-16-1212-1998.pdf By using this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra7FMnpWMhY and all is explained here http://www.iki.rssi.ru/asp/pub_sha1/pub_sha1.htm It looks like their on there way to achieving their goal http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf Man made weather modification is the new norm

May 11, 2013 9:12 pm

We are told Earth’s atmospheric heat is due to the greenhouse effect.
We are told water in the atmosphere is responsible for 95% of the greenhouse heat effect, the remaining 5% being due to the other trace greenhouse gases largely represented by carbon dioxide. But lets just assume a worse case scenario that the whole 5% is due to carbon dioxide.
We’re told by the IPCC that more carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere each year is causing global warming.
In its 2007 report – IPCC AR4 – the IPCC indicates that 97% of the carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere each year is from natural sources and only 3% is from human activities. This means then that 4.85% of the extra greenhouse heat effect is caused by carbon dioxide from natural sources leaving only 0.15 of 1% due to human activities.
But carbon dioxide represents approximately 72% of the other trace greenhouse gases, right? Which means the greenhouse heat effect from human activity carbon dioxide emissions is more like about 0.11 of 1% rather than 0.15 of 1%.
Are people really serious that this incredibly insignificant contribution to the greenhouse heat effect (0.11 of 1%) by human activity is causing dangerous global warming and is the key driver of climate change?
Or have people now simply lost all sense of proportion, reality and common sense?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights