Climate Explainers Tackle All That Snow

Fridge or freezer left in a ditch.
Fridge or freezer left in a ditch. Malcolm Campbell [CC BY-SA 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The localised US “global warming hole” seems to have taken an excursion to Northern Africa, Europe, Russia, Asia and Great Britain over the last few weeks, but this hasn’t stopped climate explainers from trying to fit all that cold and snow into their global warming narrative.

Q&A: What does all this snow mean for climate change?

Why are scientists worried about freezing temperatures in winter, is the beast from the east a freak event – and what is the polar vortex?

Q: What are they worried about?

A: In the past couple of weeks, there has been a heatwave in the sunless Arctic even though the northern polar region has not had any sunlight since October. At times it has been warmer than London, Paris or New York.

Q: So why worry? I feel sorry for the polar bears, but nobody lives in the north pole.

A: There is another theory about what is happening that could have much wider implications. The biggest concern is that this might indicate a weakening or collapse of the polar vortex.

Q: Could it be connected to the blizzards that many people are experiencing?

A: In December, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration warned Arctic sea ice was declining at the fastest rate in at least 1,500 years with an impact that would be felt far outside the region and affect the lives of every single American. One of the research team, Jeremy Mathis, compared the Arctic to the planet’s refrigerator.

But the door to that refrigerator has been left open,” he said. “And the cold is spilling out, cascading throughout the northern hemisphere.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/28/what-does-snow-mean-climate-change-beast-from-the-east-polar-vortex-freezing-temperature

See, a nice simple explanation – the world is warming, but much of the North is feeling really cold at the moment, because someone left the fridge door open.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
5 1 vote
Article Rating
166 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 28, 2018 10:09 pm

You never hear much about solar magnetic effects on the jet stream, strange that

February 28, 2018 11:07 pm

It’s definitely all the fault of the Americans. I see it on American films and TV shows. A person goes to the fridge, opens the door, takes out milk or orange juice, stands in front of the open fridge while drinking straight from the carton. (Apparently Americans have not mastered cup or glass technology.) Clearly, that is what is happening on a larger scale.

Alan Tomalty
Reply to  RoHa
February 28, 2018 11:31 pm

yah so many Americans opening their fridge doors. The cause of global warming was staring us in the face all this time. Blame it on that BAD BAD television encouraging everybody to drink while holding their fridge doors open. Well i guess we will have to ban fridges. thats ok the electricity will soon be to costly to run them because of greenie policies. Everywhere in the world and i mean everywhere where solar and wind have been subsidized(except for [places that have hydroelectricity) ;electricity prices have gone through the roof

knr
March 1, 2018 12:04 am

They are indeed putting in a lot of work to find reason why ‘climate doom ‘ is still on track despite all the cold and all the white stuff we were told children would not experience. And times goes on the excuses will get stupider ,and oddly given that most people have little interest in the subject what is does is remind people of the BS claims in the first place and is therefore counter productive .

pat
March 1, 2018 12:07 am

the CAGW mob and the MSM are fixated on the “warming”!
1 Mar: SMH: Peter Hannam: The scientists planning to get stuck in the ice to plug a climate gap
For Markus Rex, this week’s midwinter Arctic heatwave is the perfect justification for the most ambitious climate research effort ever planned at the top of the world.
Professor Rex is a leading atmospheric climate researcher at Germany’s University of Potsdam but also the project co-ordinator for a €60 million ($95 million) year-long scientific expedition to improve the understanding of the processes under way in the fastest-warming part of the planet.
“We want to find out why the warming in the Arctic is so dramatic and so much more rapid than in the rest of the world,” he told Fairfax Media. “There are strong feedback mechanisms that we do not understand.”
The week’s warm, moist air injection in the Arctic circle has pushed temperatures above zero at what is usually about the coldest time of the year. The ejection of cold air from the region has triggered snow storms and frigid conditions over much of Europe.
As part of the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate – dubbed MOSAiC – dozens of scientists will be based on board the icebreaker RV Polarstern from October 2019.
Launching from the Siberian coast, the ship will become locked in sea ice and then drift with the currents for at least a year…
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/scientists-get-stuck-in-ice-arctic-20180301-p4z2aw.html

tty
Reply to  pat
March 1, 2018 12:36 am

So they are going to repeat what Fram did in 1893-96 and Sedov in 1938-40. Might make for some interesting comparisons.
“The week’s warm, moist air injection in the Arctic circle has pushed temperatures above zero at what is usually about the coldest time of the year. The ejection of cold air from the region has triggered snow storms and frigid conditions over much of Europe.”
However it was actually the other way around. The cold outbreak came first. I know since I live in Sweden.

Ed Zuiderwijk
March 1, 2018 12:11 am

The Guardian wisely has not allowed comments to that tripe. Someone there must have not lost his or mind.

tty
March 1, 2018 12:32 am

The whole thing is quite simple. A strong blocking high over Europe diverted an Atlantic low to head north over the Fram passage: result snow in Greenland and a few mild hours at the North Pole.
The next Atlantic low turned to the south instead. Result: snow in Spain and southern France.
The first low was climate the second is weather.

Brett Keane
Reply to  tty
March 1, 2018 1:59 am

Two or three thousand Manhattans of snow on Greenland, I read and saw on the DMI graph…..

Carbon500
March 1, 2018 12:50 am

Here in the UK, the snow is falling. I’m now 69 years of age, and despite all the hype and doomsday reassurancies, the climate has not changed. We still get the variety of weather we always have – hot summers, cool summers, rainy summers, milder winters, cold winters, plus the occasional unusual events.
1975 for example saw a hot summer, with a snowfall in June. On a lesser scale, this happened in 2009 as well. No doubt global warming would be the explanation these days for the summer snow!
I’m not a climatologist of any stripe, hence I’ve had to read and sift material on the global warming issue. Comments made for example by meteorologist Williams James Burroughs in his book ‘Climate Change’ (Cambridge University Press, 2001) are relevant here. On p186 he comments that the range of extreme UK temperatures for January during the period 1772-1821 compared with 1946-95 is virtually unchanged, but a large shift in the median temperature (half the population lie above it, and half below) is seen. He goes on to comment that the changes affecting winter temperatures in the British Isles over the last 200 years or so are a matter of a shift in weather patterns rather than a significant warming of the northern hemisphere.
Moving on from this, the Köppen climate classification stresses that a range of temperatures are relevant in describing climate – how often do we see this in any discussion of the issue? Never – all ‘bloggers’ seem obsessed with fractional claimed global averages’
A favourite observation of mine is a reader’s letter from the UK’s Sunday Telegraph newspaper ( page 23 on Tuesday October 1st 2013) from Captain Derek Blacker RN (retd.), Director of Naval Oceanography and Meteorology 1982-84. He said this:
“I was a meteorologist during the Seventies when glaciers in Europe and other continents had been growing for the previous ten years, and pack ice had been increasing during winters to cover almost all of the Denmark Strait between Iceland and Greenland. Scientists were then warning that the Earth could be entering another ice age. The current deliberations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have conveniently overlooked this. Before insisting that humans have been the main cause of global warming an explanation of this apparent anomaly should be promulgated.”
In connection with this letter, a look at information supplied by the Icelandic Meteorological Office is interesting. During the first two decades of the twentieth century, “heavy sea ice was quite common along the coasts of Iceland, but in the 1920s a drastic change occurred. Sea ice along the coasts of Iceland became an uncommon event, and almost a forgotten phenomenon around the middle of the century. An abrupt change occurred in the mid-1960s. Heavy sea ice formed almost each year following that period, but since 1980 widespread and long-lasting sea ice off Iceland is seen at rather irregular intervals.”
Some of the important fishing areas around Iceland are located on the shallow banks off the coast of Greenland at about 63ºN. These banks can be ice-covered during most of the year, causing difficulties for the fishing vessels. Ice edges form ‘tongues’ which extend like giant hooks when viewed from a satellite, extending for many kilometres (over 100km for example) and curving back towards the main ice sheet. These ice tongues, which can change rapidly from one day to another, are particularly important for fishing vessels operating near the ice edge. In some cases the ice tongues can turn back towards the main ice pack and vessels near the ice edge can be trapped. Consequently trawlers need accurate ice edge maps updated every day.
These are real world observations rather than suppositions based on modelled temperature based on the assumption that CO2 is causing dangerous global warming matter.
To end, William James Burroughs comments in his book referred to above that the Central England Temperature (CET) ‘confirms the exceptionally low temperatures of the 1690s and in particular the cold springs of this decade. Equally striking is the sudden warming from the 1690s to the 1730s. In less than forty years the conditions went from the depths of the little ice age to something comparable to the warmest decades of the twentieth century’.
Let’s wait and see what happens next!

Reply to  Carbon500
March 1, 2018 1:37 am

What those two years have in common is that the snow storm came around the time of the solar minimum, just as we are currently close to the solar minimum now. Regarding your “…1975 for example saw a hot summer, with a snowfall in June. On a lesser scale, this happened in 2009 as well …”. Also, both of those summers were hot summers in California. Our coasts share many similarities in their weather patterns.

Reply to  goldminor
March 1, 2018 2:08 am

The other thing which they have in common is that 1975 is several years before the start of the warming trend, and that 2009 is several years after the shift point where warning peaks settles out, and then starts to fall, imo.

Carbon500
Reply to  goldminor
March 1, 2018 3:44 am

Interesting observations. Thanks, goldminor.

Olavi
March 1, 2018 12:56 am

It’s still the SUN STUPID! We are heading to solar minimum after a low cycle. 1/1000 of sun’s output is million times more energy than we produce total in this planet.

Coeur de Lion
March 1, 2018 1:19 am

I note that earthnullschool has the North Pole at minus 29C today. Thawing away!

NorwegianSceptic
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
March 1, 2018 4:07 am

On the night between wed./thu. this week, there has been 21 new norwegian cold records for march, according to official readings.
https://www.nrk.no/hordaland/21-nye-norske-kulderekorder-satt-i-natt-1.13935896
Must be because we now have to many Teslas beacuse of government subsidies…..

Brett Keane
March 1, 2018 1:50 am

Germinio
February 28, 2018 at 3:53 pm: Here in NZ, we have been sitting in a warm blob caused by cyclic (18yr-5yr repeating IIRC) lunar tidal cycle gyre plus remnant failed enso cycle warm water. All obvious if one watches the maps. It is now fading as the general Quiet Sun conditions regain control even of tiny NZ in its enormous and cooling South Pacific ocean.
The ‘hot arctic causing loopy jetstream’ warmista tripe reverses the energy flux from reality. As usual with these charlitans, Germinio.
In fact, it started as the higher solar radiation bands faltered a few years ago, causing equatorial thermosphere/mesosphere levels to fall. Or Hubble would have burnt up by now, or soon, a well known fact. This energy loss relaxed the pressure-differential from equator to poles. That is what primarily allows loopy or meridional jetstreams. Your hot arctic air radiates its merely less cold air’s energy to to the real cold of space. Very quickly.
Try to think also of how lesser input versus unimpaired, possibly enhanced polar exit of energy plays out in longer-term GAST. The penny has dropped and I have finally realised
The collateral of this is that, as well as more rapid air cooling, we get less solar deep heating (a few hundred metres) of the oceans. A double whammy the warmistas have no chance of assimilating while their fraud fragments. Winning is fun, but cooling is not. Folk who push for higher heating costs, like warmista, should and will be shamed. Cheers from Brett

Brett Keane
Reply to  Brett Keane
March 1, 2018 2:12 am

Oops! …finally realised that the more direct meridional transport would speed movement and increase differentials and vigourous weather too. A mark of mini/LIA’s.

March 1, 2018 1:59 am

Does anyone remember when some voices were pointing fingers at the above average Alaskan temps seen earlier in this winter? Well turn around is fair play. The PV has struck, …https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-139.28,58.60,1821/loc=-142.479,60.831

Brett Keane
Reply to  goldminor
March 1, 2018 2:17 am

I would say, send Barry O back to that melting village to preach warming at them. Inuit have a traditional way of dealing with useless mouths.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  goldminor
March 1, 2018 2:46 am

Looks like snow in Victoria. Anyone for skying?

Anonymous
March 1, 2018 2:00 am

We live in a world of magic where one beliefs become reality. Therefore I blame Michael Mann and all his followers for this mess.
OK /sarc OFF now:
“Cape Morris Jesup at the northern tip of Greenland […] has recorded 61 hours above 0C” that’s with or without temperature “adjustments”?

paqyfelyc
Reply to  Anonymous
March 1, 2018 3:24 am

This place is a “foehn” place, that can be quite hot (relatively), it just need the wind to blow in a special direction. Nothing to do with climate change, of course, unless the almighty AGW can also change wind direction (why not, it has so much powa).

DWR54
March 1, 2018 2:23 am

…the world is warming, but much of the North is feeling really cold at the moment, because someone left the fridge door open.

Although there have been cold periods (I’m living through one right now!) the northern hemisphere as a whole, not just the high Arctic, was warmer than average during February. That’s going by the reanalysis carried out by University of Maine. For the past week or so the NH has been >1C above the 1979-2000 average for each day, including today.comment image
Hopefully Roy Spencer will put out the preliminary UAH TLT satellite temperature data for February today or tomorrow, so we’ll see whether it agrees with the surface reanalysis re above average NH temperatures.

Richard M
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 7:59 am

DWR54, once again you show why it is so obvious that the AMO is responsible for much of the recent warming.

DWR54
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 8:03 am

Northern hemisphere TLT temperatures in February +0.24 above 1981-2010 average according to Roy: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2018/03/uah-global-temperature-update-for-february-2018-0-20-deg-c/

paqyfelyc
March 1, 2018 3:15 am

greeniad …
Was it so hard to say “weather is not climate”?
Yes it was, as this would had destroyed the ominous “look, there is [insert heat, storm, flood or whatever event], this is climate change” meme of theirs.

Bruce Cobb
March 1, 2018 6:05 am

Well, I for one can’t get over how wasteful and irresponsible Ma Nature has been, leaving the fridge door open like that. Doesn’t she realize that, although we are currently in an interglacial period we are still in an ice age? And that even though we’ve had some warming since the LIA, that we may in fact be going into a period of cooling, possibly lasting for decades? Doesn’t she know that it is cooling, not warming that is dangerous to man, and to all life? Shame on her!

ResourceGuy
March 1, 2018 6:48 am

Yes, collapse of the Polar Vortex right after collapse or slowing of the Gulf Stream other fill-in-the-blank speculative scare statements. This Q&A sounds similar to verbiage now used at some national park displays on science and the environment, i.e. unsupported speculations to extend the bias.

KLohrn
March 1, 2018 7:34 am

comment image
They’re trying for another Nobel Prize its been a while.

DWR54
Reply to  KLohrn
March 1, 2018 8:09 am

That chart says the globe warmed at a rate of 0.174 C/dec over the last 10 years and 0.235 C/dec over the past 5 years.

KLohrn
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 9:55 am

and tolerance for error is 0.4C, so yeah zero sum

MarkW
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 2:26 pm

And it took the strongest El Nino in decades to even get that much.

Scott Wilmot Bennett
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 5:25 pm

==> DWR54
However:

The linear temperature trend of the global average lower tropospheric temperature anomalies from January 1979 through February 2018 remains at +0.13 C/decade. – Roy Spencer

VB_Bitter
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 7:09 pm

Doesn’t that chart simply show that the average temp now is pretty much the same as the average temp in 2005? (even if you can play with trend lines).

DWR54
Reply to  DWR54
March 2, 2018 6:09 am

VB_Bitter

Doesn’t that chart simply show that the average temp now is pretty much the same as the average temp in 2005? (even if you can play with trend lines).

Two months that occur years apart may happen to have similar temperature anomalies, or the earlier one might even be warmer than the more recent one, but that doesn’t say a great deal about what changes may have occurred between those two points. You have to take account of the intervening anomalies to get the full picture, and that’s what linear trends do.
For instance, the temperature anomaly in UAH in December 1987 was 0.371 C; whereas in January 2018 it was just 0.256 C. No reasonable person would draw a straight line between these two points and declare that there has been global cooling in UAH since Dec 1987! Indeed, the linear trend shows that there has been statistically significant warming in UAH since Dec 1987 (0.126 ±0.091 °C/decade (2σ)).comment image
Likewise with the above chart. Individual anomalies back in 2007 might be similar to those over recent months, but the underlying trend since then is still a warming one, as the chart itself states.

MarkW
Reply to  DWR54
March 2, 2018 7:06 am

Rob, what La Nina? One hasn’t started yet.
Regardless, if you want to take out both El Nino and La Nina, you will find agreement with me.
Unlike you, I’m not a hypocrite.

VB_Bitter
Reply to  DWR54
March 3, 2018 9:12 pm

DW
The first graph is NCEP CFSR 2005 – 2017
the second is UAH 1985 -2017
But Ok I take your point.
Anyone can see the rise in the average anomally in the satellite record just like they see it in GISS or Hadcrut. At a rate no faster than many other changes in the earth’s history.
I’m not disputing there has been a temperature rise. A pretty small one since a very cold period (the Little Ice Age)
But no reasonable person would get uptight about a 0.174 c degree increase in an anomaly over 10 years when the last record was pretty much the same as the last.
No reasonable person would try and make a point about a 0.235 increase over the last 5 years when the last record showed a temperature anomaly pretty much the same as the the start.
No reasonable person would get uptight about:
 “warming in UAH since Dec 1987 to now of (0.126 ±0.091 °C/decade (2σ)).”
Those trends are not scary and there is no garrantee those trends will continue to go up either.

DWR54
Reply to  KLohrn
March 1, 2018 10:15 am

KLohrn

and tolerance for error is 0.4C, so yeah zero sum

Where did you get that 0.4C figure from please? Even if it’s correct, the chart still shows ‘best estimate’ warming over the past 10 years; or since Gore released his movie back in 2007. That’s in agreement with all the other global temperature data sources, including UAH TLT satellite data.
In the RSS satellite TLT, which AFAIK uses the same source material as UAH, the warming since 2007 is statistically significant (0.419 ±0.374 °C/decade (2σ)): http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~cowtan/applets/trend/trend.html

KLohrn
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 10:20 am

Exactly a zero sum. I’m not sure the give Nobel Prizes for zero sums, but anything is possible in the future.

DWR54
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 10:34 am

KLohrn

Exactly a zero sum.

No source for the 0.4 figure you quoted?
All the global temperature data sets, whether surface or satellite, including the one you linked to, show best estimate warming since 2007. GISS, HadCrut4, NOAA, Berkeley, and RSS all show statistically significant warming since 2007.
How’s that a ‘zero sum’ exactly?

KLohrn
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 11:15 am

> 0.419 ±0.374 °C

DWR54
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 11:19 am

KLohrn

0.419 ±0.374 °C

That’s the warming rate quoted by RSS since 2007 that I linked to earlier.
The fact that the best estimate rate (0.419) is higher than the uncertainty (0.374) at the >95% confidence level confirms that the warming is statistically significant. Even if we deduct the error margin from the best estimate we still get a warming trend.
That’s what statistical significance means.

MarkW
Reply to  DWR54
March 1, 2018 2:27 pm

If there is no error on the data, then there is no need for any error on the rate.

KLohrn
Reply to  KLohrn
March 1, 2018 11:46 am

To be statistically significant would need a register as 1 on any associated scale. Otherwise insignificant (statistically speaking) or otherwise in relation to the scale Celsius. Unless you want to discuss the significance of a zero sum on any scale. Which in this case, we are.

Reasonable Skeptic
March 1, 2018 9:09 am

“But the door to that refrigerator has been left open,” he said. “And the cold is spilling out, cascading throughout the northern hemisphere.”
Would the person that left the fridge open be Mother Nature?

ptolemy2
March 1, 2018 10:42 am

Here’s the beeb’s rage against reality:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43158532

KLohrn
March 1, 2018 12:22 pm

Soon all refrigerators shipped in UL listed confines will need to come equipped “Gore-n-height” thermostats, these will of course registers and read those millitemps 0.011 C or F that were so wide degrees in the past.

Richard
March 1, 2018 1:01 pm

Global Warming – the irrefutable theory. Is it scientific if it cannot be disproved? Like faith?

zazove
Reply to  Richard
March 1, 2018 3:04 pm

Is the anthropogenic CO2 caused contribution to warming significant? you don’t you mean Richard. Keep up.

Richard
Reply to  zazove
March 1, 2018 3:28 pm

It probably is. But that’s not what Global Warming is all about. It’s that the warming is inexorable, due exclusively to CO2, universally bad, catastrophic in fact, that we can control our climate by legislation. That we live on a wobbly sphere, spewing volcanoes, in a not completely stable, complicated orbit around the Sun, which undergoes changes of its own, and the milky way, amid space objects, cosmic rays and dust, in no way factors into our climate equation.

zazove
Reply to  zazove
March 1, 2018 4:19 pm

Inexorable? for decades it seems yes. Exclusively? no, but who claims that? Universally? also no, no one claims that either. Again, if so who? Catastrophic? depends how warm one supposes.
You agree that it “probably is” contributing to significant warming, then how warm is too warm to push the climate system Richard? Lets not find out the hard way.