Guest post by A. Scott
Even though we all know “weather is not “climate,” that rarely stops CAGW’s fiercest proponents, so we might as well have a little fun with it as well. This weekend is the 2013 Minnesota State Fishing Opener. And the joke around these parts is the most important equipment a fisherman needs this year is …. an ice auger.
Minnesota, like much of the country (as reported at WUWT here) is currently undergoing its own ‘little ice age’ with record late season snows (18″ in southeastern MN a week ago) and cold, and near record ice out dates on the State’s lakes. Lakes in the southern third of the State saw ice outs approaching new records and many lakes in the northern half of the state are still ice covered today.
“Lake Minnetonka” in the Mpls/St. Paul area finally saw ice out on May 2nd, which easily could have been extended to May 5th or 6th had the 18″ snowstorm moved about 40 miles to the West. The Freshwater Society history shows 134 years of ice out dates for Lake Minnetonka, going back to the mid 1800’s. Median ice out for Lake Minnetonka over the last 150+ years is April 14th. Only 3 years – 1856, 1857 and 1859 – saw later ice out dates than 2013.
The story is more fun as you travel to central and northern Minnesota. Outdoors writer and photographer Ron Hustvedt wote today in a story in the Star Tribune:
In 30-plus years of fishing the mythical Minnesota walleye opener, I can safely say I’ve never seen ice on my favorite lakes this late in the season. It’s been close a few years but never like this and, according to the record books, only a time or two like this in the last century.
The picture above isn’t just a random ice auger shot – its real, from earlier today. Here’s another … 
Please do not try this at home – these guys intimately knew the area, were well outfitted with life preservers and safety gear, and never ventured into areas more than a few feet deep.
In another story, from Thursday, the Star Tribune’s Doug Smith notes:
Some of Minnesota’s most popular fishing lakes are expected to be iced in on Saturday’s fishing opener — an occurrence not seen in perhaps 60 years. Ice reportedly is still 2 feet thick on some northern lakes, and … major lakes from Lake Mille Lacs north … still could be mostly ice-covered Saturday. “There will be substantial ice cover on the northern third of the state,’’ said Henry Drewes, Department of Natural Resources regional fisheries manager in Bemidji. “It will not be gone by Saturday. This is certainly the most significant late-season ice cover I have seen in my 25 years with the DNR.’’
Some great live pictures from MN lake webcams at www.mnlakecams.com
Oh, and it was snowing earlier today in Duluth, MN. On May 11th.
And here’s what you really came to see – a live, active “glacier” – a moving wall of ice – a ‘little ice age’- right here, right now, in Minnesota today 😉 …
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@Lew Skannen –
Well, you do know that the alarmies believe water freezes into ice when you heat it, and 2 + 2 = 5, etc.
Moe, try telling the folks in England and Germany (thousands of deaths from hypothermia, not overheating) that it’s getting warmer.
Your claim that 10 of the last 11 years were the hottest of the last 150 is so obviously false and so totally contradicted by solid empirical data as to be ludicrous. Even the big alarmies like Hansen and Jones and the IPCC are having to admit that there has been no warming for 17 years and are having to abandon their attrempts to cover up previous warm periods, warmer than today.
You’re the one who needs to get real about climate, Moe.
“2. Been made mute by satellite data.”
Which shows NO WARMING for the last 17 years !!
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/07/solar-cycle-update-suns-magnetic-activity-still-in-a-slump/#comments
1. Been shown to be incorrect,
no it hasn’t.
Chad,
‘NASA scientists say 2012 was the ninth warmest of any year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. With the exception of 1998, the nine warmest years in the 132-year record all have occurred since 2000, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the hottest years on record.’
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-temps.html
Where is your evidence to show it is wrong?
And I can also cherry pick data Chad. I agree people are experiencing exceptionally and unseasonal COLD weather, while others are experiencing exception and unseasonal HOT and dry weather. But be fair, the hot records that are being broken out number the ocld records by a factor of 3 to one. Look at the big picture.
AndyG55, My point was that the problem with siting thermometers was made mute (actually I think that should be moot) by satelitte data.
I don’t know why you are introducing the surface temperature with the siting of the thermometers. It is a different issue.
On another not, do you know anything about statistics? Would care to calculate if you statement no warming in 17 years is statistically significant?
And as I said, the earth is accumulating heat, and most of that is going into water (at the moment).
Look at any graph showing the surface temperatures for the last 150 years, you will see periods of time where it appears to level off, then off it goes trending up again. Never does it get colder after an apparent plateau. Never ever, and it will not while we keep throwing extra blankets around the earth in the form of extra C02.
Still waiting on your evidence for ‘the son taking a snooze’ theory. I presume you just didn’t make it up and can point to some research.
TomR,Worc,MA
You can start here.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/07/us-climate-oceans-idUSBRE93608420130407
I thought that was normal for Minnesota.
Frost warnings all the way down to TN and NC tonight….
Moe says:
May 12, 2013 at 4:11 pm
Markx, thanks for the reference. From what I can read, it addresses the uncertainty with calibration rather than conclusion that the earth is heating up. They are saying (or as far as I can read), the heat is still accumulating on the earth, but there is some contention about how much it is accumulating. Please advise if I had read this incorrectly.
Correct Moe, the satellite tells us the imbalance over that period was 6.5Wm2 when theory and modeling tells us it should have been 0.85 Wm2 – ie, the measure is 7.65 times the theoretical value. And yes, I think there are few questions that we are warming, the questions relate to degree and causes, and the extent that humans are responsible.
The satellite measure has been adjusted to match the theoretical value, and then the satellite measure is used as proof to support the theoretical value, a circular ‘proof’.
Further, if you also take into account the tenuous credibility of the ocean heat increment measurements, the proofs become ever more circular:
1. How good was the global coverage in 1955, and onward through to 2003 when full Argo float deployment was made?
2. Is there an issue with splicing together results from at least 4 or 5 different measurement methods? (rope and bucket, then reversing thermometers, ship cooling intake water, then XPTs, and now Argo floats).
3. There are 4 or 5 different types of Argo floats, all with their own sensing/programming quirks, and significant data adjustment is required to cope with this.
4. The main issue requiring adjustment is that pressure sensor errors can result in depth recording errors, and a drift of only 5 meters in depth measures could account for all the energy accumulation thus far measured by the Argo system.
5. Statistically speaking, repeated measurements of the same parameter by the same inaccurate tool can be mathematically resolved to provide a very high precision measure. But, are repeated measurements at different times, depths, positions of the ocean by thousands of instruments ever a repeated measure of the same thing?
Theoretical data ‘proven’ by satellite data after satellite data is adjusted to match theoretical data, then both can be used to match ocean data, where there is still much debate about ‘missing heat’?
Loeb et al 2008
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008JCLI2637.1
Moe,
You make a lot of assertions, but you provide no scientific evidence to support your assertions. For example, you say:
“Never does it get colder after an apparent plateau. Never ever, and it will not while we keep throwing extra blankets around the earth in the form of extra C02.”
See here. Now explain to us again how CO2 is causing global warming. Because I just don’t see it.
You are free to believe that ‘extra blankets of CO2’ cause global warming. Just as the Jehovah’s Witnesses are free to believe in the Rapture. But your belief is no more scientific than the Jehovah’s Witnesses religion is. Your unscientific belief is refuted by real world observations.
[Also, please, do not link to the credibilty-challenged Reuters site, which says: “Warmth is spreading to ever deeper ocean levels, he said, adding that pauses in surface warming could last 15-20 years.” That directly violates the 2nd Law; heat rises, it does not ‘spread ever deeper’.]
Moe says:
May 12, 2013 at 4:11 pm
Markx, thanks for the reference. From what I can read, it addresses the uncertainty with calibration rather than conclusion that the earth is heating up. They are saying (or as far as I can read), the heat is still accumulating on the earth, but there is some contention about how much it is accumulating. Please advise if I had read this incorrectly.
Hi Moe, a useful addition to my reply above.
Trenberth comment of Ocean heat content Jan 2012:
From http://judithcurry.com/2012/01/24/missing-heat-isnt-missing-after-all/
and http://davidappell.blogspot.com/2012/01/trenberth-response-to-todays-loeb-et-al.html
Kevin Trenberth responds at Quark Soup. Concluding paragraph:
So while their conclusions may be valid: yes there is no evidence of a discrepancy, given their uncertainties, and yes there is no “statistically significant” decline in OHC rates of change, but the uncertainties are so large that neither dataset is useful to know what is really going on, and that is the key point. The discrepancies among OHC data sets remain huge. We MUST do better. So the key point in their title is “within uncertainty”. It should add: “but the uncertainty is too large.”
Minnesota: It is like watching the Ice Age Cartoon in REAL LIFE!!! Check it out! -Paul
Amateur video captures a wave of ice blanketing backyards and threatening houses in the Mille Lacs Lake area of Minnesota. (May 12) http://youtu.be/7rxqz-_feBQ
Moe;
Look at any graph showing the surface temperatures for the last 150 years, you will see periods of time where it appears to level off, then off it goes trending up again. Never does it get colder after an apparent plateau.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Look at any graph of temps since the Little Ice Age about 400 years ago. You’ll see pretty much the exact same thing. What you won’t see is any acceleration despite exponential increases in co2 in the last few decades.
Moe;
Never ever, and it will not while we keep throwing extra blankets around the earth in the form of extra C02.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Moe, the effective black body temperature of earth is exactly the same before CO2 doubles as it is afterward. Greenhouse theory requires a change in the temperature gradient from earth surface to top of atmosphere, but no change in the average itself. If you’re going to be a warmist, at least learn the warmist physics first.
As for the balance of your argument, I invite you to look at NOAA data that should put things in better perspective for you:
http://www.greenworldtrust.org.uk/Science/Images/ice-HS/noaa_gisp2_icecore_anim_adj.gif
Moe says:
May 12, 2013 at 4:07 pm
I assume “sunnis” is a spell-“correction” of a typo that should have been “sun is”.
From my Guide to WUWT:
2008 Jun 2: Livingston and Penn paper: “Sunspots may vanish by 2015” – http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/06/02/livingston-and-penn-paper-sunspots-may-vanish-by-2015/ .
By my reckoning, this is the most fascinating material I’ve read on WUWT. Now in mid-2010 the data is pretty much tracking predictions some four years after the paper was written.
Latest update 2010 Sep 18: Sun’s magnetics remain in a funk: sunspots may be on their way out – http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/18/suns-magnetics-remain-in-a-funk-sunspots-may-be-on-their-way-out/ . This reports on a new paper Long-term Evolution of Sunspot Magnetic Fields. An updated estimate of the majority of sunspots becoming invisible is 2021-2022, but I and others think some of the delay is due to some events already being invisible and hence aren’t included in the average, and that leads to an apparently slower decline.
Snow over the Highlands of Scotland fell at the weekanend, and more is forecast for today and tomorrow. Even in Wales, snow is forecast for tomorrow.
When I say Highlands, the UK is not particularly mountainess, so maybe around 2500 to just over 4000ft. So this is snow falling at relatively low altitude. In Scotland, at this time of year, it is unusual but not of course unique. I can’t recall snow falling mid May in Wales, but no doubt it has before.
But it is an indication of how a cold winter this year has lingered over Europe. Where I am in Spain, I would guess that temperatures are about 6 or so weeks behind the norm. I can usually go swimming in my pool at Easter (end of March/early April) but this year it is too cold. I have not yet been swimming and rather doubt that I shall be able to do so before the end of the month.
Yes, but it is only a mild cold.
@ur momisugly Ric Werme…I see a chance for the next minimum to come in around 2016/17 or 2017/18. I lean towards the first choice as more likely. The reason for this thought is I believe that the Pacific Northwest flood cycle is going to return to its 9 year pattern. This is where my interest in CC really took off about 4 years ago and is most likely the main reason why I was drawn in. Four years ago someone linked me to a solar min/max chart in comments, might have been Space Guy. It took me about ten seconds of looking at it before I realized that the solar minimums correlated with the 9 year flood cycle of the Pacific Northwest. I made a comment at the time {on Newsvine} and it drew some interest. Then one comment asked “and what does that mean?”. I had to state that I didn’t know, but that I would think about it. Now after these intervening year, it seems that pieces of this puzzle are becoming clearer. I took a look at older weather records to fill in the flood years that I did not know for sure. When I got into the early 1920s, the next 9 year flood was not there. It seemed to be 12 years away and there seemed to be another around 12 years before that. That was the best I could do in looking back to find the flood years. Then I noticed that after the 1973/74 solar minimum and weak flood year that the next flood cycle had jumped around 12 years. The next 12 year flood was in the winter of 1996/97. It was a semi-biblical rain event in Northern California. Followed, of course, by the mighty El Nino of 1997/98. Then there is a 3rd 12 year weak flood in 2007/08. The next one is going to switch back to the 9 year pattern…1973/74, 1864/65, 1955/56, 1946/47, 1937/38, 1928/29. 64/65 and 55/56 were very heavy floods. Anyway, this means that the next flood and the next minimum is likely to fall in 2016/17. The flood always hits close to the bottom or at the bottom of the solar minimum. This could mean that it hits as the min approachs, or after the min swings back to the max. I was puzzled over how the 9 year cycle could hold its place in an 11 + year solar cycle, but then the jump to 12 years {approx} on the flood explained why. It goes 3 cycles and that maintains the solar minimum flood cycle to correspond to the bottom of the minimum.
In the list of flood years the second example should read 1964/65 and not 1864/65. A minor mistake.
Moe very obviously suffers from a brain-blinding case of “Sketpical-Science” misinformation !
By inhabiting SkS he receives about 0.01 % of the actual facts.
whoops, I meant 0.04%…
“. . . . cutting the ice, moving it and carrying it in sailing ships. Not to mention the ice [store] houses needed for keeping the ice through the summer.”
Caused Global Warming dontchaknow? . . . Ice storage relied on sawdust, sawdust (as well as sailing ships) came from trees, lack of trees kicked off CO2 explosion, CO2 caused warming, requiring refrigeration, requiring industrialization, requiring Coal, Oil, requiring ritual, lemming-like warming-mitigating suicide of Human Race. Reversal of warming due to Human extinction allows Earth to cool and nearly all life on the Planet to be extinguished during subsequent Ice Age. . . . . ‘Gaia’ saved!
@ur momisugly Ric “and hence aren’t included in the average, and that leads to an apparently slower decline.”
plus of course the massive interia of the water in the oceans. Hard to say, but I suspect the Sun’s sleepiness will kick in over the next couple of years. Time will tell.
I hope those countries in the colder northern hemisphere are awake to the issue. Germany certainly is, LOTS of new coal fired power stations.
UK on the other hand is in the grip of the moronic CAGW agenda. They will suffer badly in the next few years.
And depending how cold it gets, those countries with lots of hydro could also have major issues.
[Snip. “Moe” is a serial troll who posts under the screen names:
Moe
Monemeith
Loch
Lowerup
Lowerup2
Pleeeeease
Thought4TheDay
BillMeLater
Overthetop
Superiorintellect
Harddoneby
LetsBeReasonable
myfirstattemptatblogs
*GeorgeSoros
Reading some of “Moe’s” past comments under different names, he is arguing both sides of the issue — typical troll behavior. Therefore, “Moe” will understand why he is being snipped. ~ mod.]
REPLY: 14, if you count George Soros, which you missed. Permanent spam bin for this one – Anthony