An "Exceptionally large amount of winter snow in Northern Hemisphere this year"

From the Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past department and the Finnish Meteorological Institute comes this press release today.

Exceptionally large amount of winter snow in Northern Hemisphere this year

The new Arctic Now product developed by the Finnish Meteorological Institute shows with one picture the extent of the area in the Northern Hemisphere currently covered by ice and snow. This kind of information, which shows the accurate state of the Arctic, becomes increasingly important due to climate change. The Arctic region will be discussed at the Arctic Meteorological Week which begins in Levi next week.

In the Northern Hemisphere the maximum seasonal snow cover occurs in March. “This year has been a year with an exceptionally large amount of snow, when examining the entire Northern Hemisphere. The variation from one year to another has been somewhat great, and especially in the most recent years the differences between winters have been very great”, says Kari Luojus, Senior Research Scientist at the Finnish Meteorological Institute.

The information has been gleaned from the Arctic Now service of the Finnish Meteorological Institute, which is unique even on a global scale. The greatest difference compared with other comparable services is that traditionally they only tell about the extent of the ice or snow situation.

“Here at the Finnish Meteorological Institute we have managed to combine data to form a single image. In this way we can get a better situational picture of the cryosphere – that is, the cold areas of the Northern Hemisphere”, Research Professor Jouni Pulliainen observes.

In addition to the coverage, the picture includes the water value of the snow, which determines the water contained in the snow.  This is important information for drafting hydrological forecasts on the flood situation and in monitoring the state of climate and environment in general.

Total amount of snow declines and snow starts to melt earlier

Information on the amount of snow is also sent to the Global Cryosphere Watch service of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMP) where the information is combined with trends and statistics of past years. Lengthy series of observation times show that the total amount of snow in the Northern Hemisphere has declined in the spring period and that the melting of the snow has started earlier in the same period. Examination over a longer period (1980-2017) shows that the total amount of snow in all winter periods has decreased on average.

Also, the ice cover on the Arctic Ocean has grown thinner and the amount and expanse of perennial ice has decreased. Before 2000 the smallest expanse of sea ice varied between 6.2 and 7.9 million square kilometres. In the past ten years the expanse of ice has varied from 5.4 to 3.6 million square kilometres. Extreme weather phenomena – winters in which snowfall is sometimes quite heavy, and others with little snow, will increase in the future.

When it was freezing cold in Finland, it was exceptionally warm at the North Pole

The Arctic area is warming at twice the speed as the rest of the world, and the impact of climate change can already be seen at the moment in the Arctic regions. On the other hand, the changes are affecting the rest of the earth.

“What happens in the Arctic regions does not stay in the Arctic regions. It also affects a wider area. The exceptional strengthening of a high-pressure area in Siberia, which brought freezing temperatures to Finland in late February and early March, may be partly the result of atmospheric warming over the Arctic Ocean.  When it is exceptionally cold somewhere in the world, it is often exceptionally warm somewhere else. This is what happened in the end of February-early March when temperatures in the North Pole were around zero degrees Celsius and it was exceptionally cold in Europe”, explains Ari Laaksonen, Scientific Director at the Finnish Meteorological Institute.

The weather fluctuates from one year to another and individual cold snaps in the Arctic area are not, as such, proof of the progression of climate change. “However, they are a reminder of how climate uncertainty has increased and that we’ll have to get use to variations in the weather as the climate change proceeds”, Laaksonen observes.


Looking at US data from NOAA’s MASIE product says the same thing:

Ditto for Rutgers Snow Lab data:

Advertisements

117 thoughts on “An "Exceptionally large amount of winter snow in Northern Hemisphere this year"

  1. “The Arctic area is warming at twice the speed as the rest of the world”
    Really, DMI show no such thing, there is a trend towards warmer winters however this is related to low ice conditions. Summer highs have not moved at all.

      • Interesting though, the MASIE data indicated Ice in the Sea of Okhotsk all the way down the Northern Japanese Island Hokkaido.
        Is Ice that far south in this region a regular happening?

      • Bob boder,
        You are not reporting accurately. The summers have been colder, according to recent DMI graphs. Even the year warmed by the 2015 “super” El Nino saw a normal summer up there rather than an above-normal one.
        Winters are warmer up there because a loopy jet streams allows the cold to pour south, and milder air must move north to replace it. When the “Beast From The East” was hitting Europe, there was quite a lot of hoopla about the backwash of milder (but still sub-freezing) air up to the Pole. Now there is the sound of crickets, due to the fact all that “mild” air has chilled over 20 degrees (Celsius) and the DMI graph shows the Pole experiencing its coldest temperatures of the winter. That cold represents a lot of heat the planet has lost, and also a big bank-account of cold up there to ruin our spring with.
        https://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2018/03/15/arctic-sea-ice-the-plunge/
        Also the DMI sea-ice “volume” graph is showing an unexpected rise.

      • Bryan A,
        The Sea of Okhotsk often freezes, due to arms of land that protect it from Pacific waters, and murderously cold air that can pour over it from Siberia. I’ve heard people comment that on a cold year you can ski from Alaska to Japan.

      • “Is Ice that far south in this region a regular happening?”
        Yes, there is some ice in Nemuro strait most winters, though there is perhaps somewhat more than usual this year. It is famous among birders for the large numbers of Giant Sea Eagles that congregate on the ice in late winter.

      • Thanks Caleb and tty…
        I’ve never heard of the “Ski from Alaska to Japan” before…I’ll have to look into that.
        Good to know that it is a fairly regular seasonal occurrence that is still happening

    • Bingo! The higher Arctic air temperatures are a result of open water creating marine environmental conditions.

    • The glaciers of New Zealand are growing and that means higher snowfall, so its not just up North.

    • It’s amazing how these people can skate around the perennially wide variations in the climate from one year to the next and STILL tie them into the global warming meme.

  2. More snow bad. Less snow bad. Everything bad. “…we’ll have to get use to variations in the weather as the climate change proceeds…” Haven’t we always done that? We certainly didn’t have to “get use” to the LIA in the long run did we?

  3. So we have to now get used to variation in the weather because of “climate change”. In the past we were not surprised to find variation in the weather because of just plain “climate”. Why do so many feel the need to genuflect to the global warming/climate change gods when discussing normal weather variation? And why is it necessary to reassure that too much snow, ice or cold is just a weather phenomenon and not evidence against global warming, whereas any extreme that supports the religious narrative of CAGW must be shouted from every church tower as a harbinger of Armageddon?

    • Because 97% of scientists agree that CO2 is creating terribly cold winters and outragous snow falls. Just look out your window and try tobdeny it.
      97% of scientists can’t be wrong, and the climate agrees, CO2 is going to force us to burn more coal to keep warm! We are at a tipping point!
      Do you see what a pickle we’re in?
      Damned if we do, damned if we don’t.
      We should have acted sooner

  4. However, they are a reminder of how climate uncertainty has increased and that we’ll have to get use to variations in the weather as the climate change proceeds.
    Pure opportunistic bullschit.
    Warm weather is from global warming.
    Cold weather means more variability which (with zero evidence) we also claim is from global warming.
    Any conceivable weather is linked to global warming by some hastily invented bullschit.

    • A little look at history over a hundred years will show that weather (aka climate to CAGW religion) has always been uncertain in the mid and high latitudes. I know because I was uncertain if it was 8 or 12 inches of snowfall last week.

      • You really need to work on better tracking/recording the amount of global warming you receive every year. Also maintain good backups of your data so if/when Thom Karl gets ahold of it, you can restore it to it’s original pristine condition

    • That is a very cynical outlook ptolomy2, direct day-to-day observations prove to us that increasing CO2 is leading to catastrophic cold and super snow falls. If you are not prepared to face observational facts and reduce your carbon footprint, then you better get used to wearing snow shoes in summer.

      • In the bad old days, climate variations were measured in on a decade or century timescale. Now, according to Alarmists, climate variations sit on a daily scale (which used to be the metric for weather).

        • ‘Political science’ tells us that a warming world will result in wilder weather, JP. They have no explanation for the documented fact that weather extremes have not changed during the last 100 years in our slightly warmer world.
          Every time one hears “the weather/climate has gotten more extreme,” one can be sure one is listening to a liar. Add PhD to the name of the liar and one knows one is listening to a paid professional liar.

      • Dave Fair – Actually there is some evidence that precipitation events are getting more intense, that droughts are getting more severe, and heat waves worse.
        Besides, getting things wrong doesn’t necessarily make someone a liar. It’s also possible that such extreme weather events have not been carefully quantified for long enough to see a signal, though it’s actually there. In that case your liars might be telling the truth.
        “Every time one hears “the weather/climate has gotten more extreme,” one can be sure one is listening to a liar. Add PhD to the name of the liar and one knows one is listening to a paid professional liar.” Are you mistaken or a liar? You must be one or the other, since I know I’m no liar.

        • “Actually there is some evidence that precipitation events are getting more intense, that droughts are getting more severe, and heat waves worse.” B.S. Cite the studies. A minor increase in average worldwide temperatures does not a heat wave make.
          “It’s also possible that such extreme weather events have not been carefully quantified for long enough to see a signal, though it’s actually there.” Religion, not science, Kristi.
          Finally, show me where you have proof that weather patterns have become more extreme, Kristi. Modelturbation won’t cut it.

      • Where exactly is this evidence? All the reports that I have seen have concluded that what has happened recently fits well within natural variation.

    • Has it ever occurred to you that simply by coming here you are going to see all kinds of alarmist BS? That this is what contributors to the site search for to feed you? Or that there might be some reasonable discussion of AGW that doesn’t follow your assumptions?
      These days there are plenty of ways to have one’s conceptions validated whether they are right or not.

      • You are a little jaded Kristi. Most of the ‘alarmist’ articles here are examples of academic shortcomings and how the climate orthodoxy uses alarmism to generate political traction to take action against certain users of the planet’s current energy usage that is supposedly ruining havoc on long term climate. There is a lot of stuff happening simultaneously over and above the pure science, such as politics. There is also a lot of money at stake, by both sides, not to mention human civilization itself. One way or the other.
        You have a lot of influence here Kristi, if you used it with intelligent discourse and debate, as I have seen you do on occasion. You won’t be banned or shunned like some alarmist blog sites do that are true echo chambers and can’t tolerate any ideas other than their own. If you are brave enough to lay out your premise and argument, I am sure you will be taken seriously and will be mostly met with a courteous robust response, as you yourself mostly have previously done as well. Although telling us to prepare to wear snow shoes in summer because of increasing CO2 as WXcycles says above, wouldn’t qualify as real debate, IMO.
        Unless you genuinely don’t believe in your own logic that somehow AGW is the root cause of a warming, changing planet, superior to all other current natural sources of a changing climate. Even if you don’t feel you will be given a fair shake here, at least you know that what you wrote here will remain public for decades to come, and will be available for future generations to examine just who was on the right track with the actual science. I think that is why the alarmist scientists fear having a real debate about the science, because they will be found to be ‘activist’ scientists, not true scientists taking them wherever the data goes. The future will most definitely give us these answers, so I encourage you to contribute to the debate here and now.

      • Earthling2 – Certainly I’m jaded. I’ve been pretty heavily involved in climate change discussions with skeptics for over a year. There’s an immense stumbling block hindering people’s vision of the science, and that is the conviction that AGW scientists have been corrupted (knowingly or not) and produce corrupt science. It follows from that that believers in AGW are basing their views on erroneous science.
        This idea bothers me more than the idea that we are doing nothing to mitigate CO2 emissions. It is one reason I have little patience for some in the contrarian scientist community and their think tank brethren who cast aspersions on climate scientists regardless of truth. Tim Ball recently had an article posted here that was written back in 2010 about the “Climategate” emails, full of his interpretation of cherry-picked excerpts. Why should this be posted now? Why do so many deniers continue to disbelieve the results of 8 independent investigations? Considering that everyone on those committees also has a reputation and career to keep, it’s ludicrous that they would all turn a blind eye to misconduct even if they wanted to protect the CRU guys (besides, they did find wrongdoing in their data sharing, a lesser evil than sci. misconduct). The desire to find wrongdoing is so strong that people assume it must be taking place, and seem to avoid investigation to see if they’re right..
        Sometimes I think such people must imagine themselves in the place of scientists, and that’s why they think science is full of corruption. I don’t think they can understand the mentality of those who become scientists (in my experience and field, anyway). There are far easier ways to influence politics, make more money, or attain notoriety. Nor can some people understand how very difficult it would be to commit fraud that had an impact when there is so much replication in climate science, so many methods to avoid bias, and the community is vast and worldwide. Why is it so hard to believe that scientists want to get it right, and that they aren’t stupid (no, they haven’t overlooked the sun’s influence!!!)? That they are aware of bias and the human tendency toward groupthink? Or that there is much healthy debate in the modeling community? That models and the science behind them are getting better, and that they’ve been limited in their efficacy all along because of computer size/speed? Or that it’s too soon to say they’ve failed when so many new ones haven’t been around long enough to be tested against new observations? People say the models have failed, but how can they even tell? They cannot predict particular events like the hiatus of the weird winter we had, but instead predict frequencies with which unusual phenomena might occur. The hiatus is not a source of embarrassment to science as much as an excellent opportunity for learning.
        I AM grateful for being allowed to freely speak my mind here, and I’ve been somewhat surprised that apparently all my comments get posted. I appreciate that. I have no idea how pro-AGW sites work or how much censorship there is. I’ve seen some really nasty comments from skeptics –
        especially on Breitbart, from which I was banned for my views (I guess; there was no other reason) – and wouldn’t be surprised if they aren’t tolerated everywhere.
        If I have any influence, it is very very small. A big part of my participation here is simply for the sake of learning, though I’m also a habitual Devil’s advocate. I also can’t stand the abuse of science either through verbal attack or the mistaken notion that one is “doing” science just because one graphs data and finds a regression line to “prove” a point. DIY science can be meaningless but still people take it as evidence, at the same time getting the impression that it’s so easy, anyone can play scientist.
        Media alarmism is a problem. So is backlash from the Right that gives the impression scientists are responsible for it. But I think the Right overreacts. Of course there is going to be alarmism – that’s what sells. Those on the Right who really want all business practices to be market-driven, and who advocate for free speech unencumbered by truth, civility or civic responsibility, have absolutely no right to complain about anything the Left says. Personally I think both the Left and Right have gone too far in their demonization of each other (and Others), and it’s bad for America.
        “Most of the ‘alarmist’ articles here are examples of academic shortcomings and how the climate orthodoxy uses alarmism to generate political traction to take action against certain users of the planet’s current energy usage that is supposedly ruining havoc on long term climate. ”
        Most of the alarmist articles here are examples of media exaggeration, not academic shortcomings. Those articles that supposedly find academic shortcomings are not always well-investigated, in my experience – it’s perception of shortcomings, or sometimes distortion of the message by media (or the WUWT author) that is usually the problem.
        When was the last time a contrarian research publication was under scrutiny for its shortcomings?
        Yes, policy is an issue. Many people think the U.S. is being irresponsible, myself included. Many like me are extremely frustrated by decades of policy being blocked due to the spread of propaganda and misinformation that has convinced many Americans it would be a far greater economic burden to gradually lower our CO2 emissions than to address the problems of climate change. At this point, considering American policy (and its potential effects on the willngness of the rest of the world to sacrifice), I’ve pretty much given up hope and don’t care what happens. I have no children. I only hope that America suffers proportionally to her CO2 contribution since she has shown such selfish disregard for others’ lives. The rationalization that a development model following ours, along with investment and technology, will save those in the third world from experiencing net negative effects of climate change have no clue about the things that slow development. Who would pay for it??? These are the some of the same people who say we were right not to sign the Paris agreement because we would be giving money to those in need (“redistributing global wealth,” a socialist paradigm).
        (Sigh. Oh, well. It’s interesting learning about climate and my fellow Americans, plus some others!)

        • Kristi, your latest rant exhibits the traits of the perfect Valley Girl.
          Additionally, your self-description as a “Devil’s Advocate” does not gibe with your slavish adherence to the official dogma.

      • P.S. – I made some very broad generalizations in my comment above. I don’t mean to imply that all in a particular group behave the same way. I very much dislike such assumptions.

      • We have people here who have been actively involved in the global warming debate since the 1980’s.

  5. ” may be partly the result of atmospheric warming over the Arctic Ocean.”
    They are determined that the Arctic temps control the vortex…..and not the vortex controls the arctic temps

  6. The Arctic is doing what the poles do, venting (radiating) heat to outer-space. The equatorial heat release from the 2015-2016 El Nino takes roughly 12-24 months to meander its way to the poles via ocean currents. With the on-gong La Nina and solar minimum approaching for the the next few years, the NH is going to get quite cold by 2020-2023.
    The elevated snow cover is to be expected when the polar oceans are more exposed with less sea ice. Sea ice is heat transfer block by limiting evaporative cooling. That makes much more moisture available to be carried over land masses to fall as snow.

  7. This may be a stupid question… but why is greenland shown with NO snowcover as well as the majority of the Alaskan and Canadian coastal ranges?

  8. The Little Ice Age ended 300 years ago. Since then, the warming Earth (thanks to fossil fuel energy replacing human, animal, and wind energy) has attained a level better for humanity and the world than ever before, and only fools want to turn back the prosperity achieved through energy technological advances.

  9. The apparent variation in weather is a function of the histrionics at the Weather Channel more than variation in weather. About 6 or 8 years ago Jim Cantore was reporting on a tropical storm, he was visibly struggling against the wind when all of a sudden a guy appeared in the background who seemed to be walking normally. They quickly switched to the studio, but the damage was already done.

    • There was similar last year with the Hurricane in Florida. I was watching a reporter talking about the increased depth of the flooding when behind there was a fire hydrant which was not disappearing under water. THen a truck drove down the road totally normally.

  10. I think we are all getting obsessed with data. Due to computers and technology. Most of it seems to be about weather with little relevance to Climate. And above it all the Climate catastrophe looms as a required element in all presentations by the Groupthink Virus.
    Who will rid me of this pestilent Meme?
    Keep up the good work Anthony. When it comes to the crunch your work will be extremely valuable.

  11. Have been looking in on the Wundergrounders – discussing ‘Skylark’ or whatever the present Nor-Easter is called.
    The storm of contradictions is quite mind-blowing even from the headline of their story:
    We’re told about YET ANOTHER winter snowstorm but the next paragraph talks about a dearth of snow (across the Sierra)
    Then a WunderMuppet tells us that at this rate of winter snow storming, Earth will soon be raining sulphuric acid – just as happens on Venus.
    Surely Earth is now in a cycle of ice-ages and ice exists for 90% ish of the time.
    Ice is bad because it reflects the sun and doesn’t store heat as the ocean does – yet still evaporates (sublimation)
    Then we need to appreciate that deserts (places with no plants) are actually cold places (nothing there to store any heat.
    Hence we need to be very careful with the plants – is it possible that they control the ice-age cycle?
    Plants depend on dirt, which like all of us, is not ever getting any younger. So, we (may) need to look after the dirt.
    Obviously, Plate Tectonics have a very large part to play in this and they move the continents so that there is very little land left below say 40 degs latitude, then what?
    Could it be that everywhere freezes and stays frozen?
    Water vapour will still exist in the atmosphere and will be blown away (ablated) by the solar wind mostly as it is the lightest of the atmospheric gasses. Its vapour [pressure will drop and more will sublimate. Till its gone.
    It has nothing else to do. No clouds and no rain to bring it back down to the surface.
    Then the oxygen and nitrogen will be blown away leaving behind what if not the heaviest of the atmospheric gasses – carbon dioxide.
    Does that sound like Mars to anyone?
    It is covered with ‘water features’ yet there is no obvious water there.
    or life. or people. or anything much really.
    just red dust. like wot u get in deserts around here eh not?

    • The Sierras are about to get another dearth of 8 to 10 feet of snow with this current storm system moving through. Even my area on the other side of the valley is slated for snow over the next 2 days. When I drive into the town of Weaverville snow covers all of the surrounding mountain ridges down to about 2500′ elevation. That is a big change from prior years, where there was zero snow anywhere to be seen at this time of year, even on 6000′ peaks.

    • Peta
      Here is a thought for you. Suppose they have the cause and effect wrong. Could the temperatures be controlled by the ice and the ice controlled by the ocean currents? In which case you would not need either CO2 or warmer temperatures to instigate a continental glaciation. An open arctic ocean might, in fact, do the trick if it increases winter precipitation enough.

    • If you lot had all been taxed to oblivion already, none of this greenhouse cooling would be occurring. If you want to know who is to blame, look in your wallets. That’s why you are all getting cold. QED.

  12. Excsuse me, and my memory may be failing, but I am sure I saw something in one of the “science” magazines when I was a “yute” back in the fifties – the article preceded the “coming ice age” stuff ten years later.
    The operational hypothesis was: Warm Arctic means more snow and eventually the contental glaciers. This is due to increased moisture moving south and falling as snow.
    I shall continue to plow thru all old magazines I can find, but maybe someone here saw the same stuff 60 years ago.
    Sounds like a good hypothesis to me, ’cause where would all thesnow come from to create thise giant glaciers?
    Gums ponders…

      • Salute Rocky! Attaboy, attaboy!
        Time was later than i recall, and I was already in high school.
        Now I have a good starting date to search in Sci Am and Pop Sci archives, which is where I think I saw the theory.
        What is striking is the last part of the story about the shrinking Arctic ice and sea level rise.Hell! We may be seeing the beginning of Armageddon and it ain’t what the CAGW crowd is expecting. Get those parkas and skis now while they are cheap.
        Gums sends…

    • “eventually the contental glaciers”
      I sure hope the glaciers remain content. Should they start rampaging, we could get in trouble in a hurry.

      • Come on, man, typing on these new-fangled pads and phones is not easy.
        OTOH, I would prefer the glaciers to be content for at least long enough for me to move on while I show my grandkids how to make fires and build snow caves.
        Gums….

  13. Regarding the Rutgers snow cover map: How about the anomaly according to the same source? https://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_daily.php?ui_year=2018&ui_day=72&ui_set=2
    Uh oh, essentially no net5 anomaly in snow coverage, if anything very slightly negative.
    And how about a graph of snow anomaly since 1967 from that source? https://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_anom.php?ui_set=0&ui_region=nhland&ui_month=2
    No trend of positive or increasing anomaly.

    • The IPCC in several reports starting in 1990, predicted/projected there would be LESS snow and more rain/freezing rain in the winter.
      28 years later no statistical decrease is found.

    • It also indicates that the only point of anomaly is at the boundary of the snow field, a slight alteration (pos. or neg.) in what is happening at the edge of the snow. The main body of the Snow Field indicates no statistical change in the anomaly for over 95% of the average snow covered area.

      • The increase in snow cover over the last 25 years has not been in Feb-June, but earlier in the season. Much of that has been lack of precipitation being replaced by snow in the fall in parts of Asia such as in Siberia.

  14. Arctic temperatures are currently at the historical mean temperature for this time of year. Snow is continuing to fall in the northern hemisphere, as it does at this time of year. Looking at historical records for ‘nor easters’ at this time of year, the current storms are not anomalous (Hat tip to Joe Bastardi, at WeatherBell!).
    What’s all the blubbering about?

    • Here in northern Maine we have had more snow than ever recorded since the last time we had this much snow, and we are only six feet from breaking the all-time record! In other words, just another winter…

  15. Suggestion! I have a bucket full of “Tails” why not let us put all this behind us and issue one to all the Climate Scientists.

  16. Yes it’s absolutely balmy in the Arctic, at least in the Canadian territory of Nunavut. Alert (82.5°N/62.3°W): -37°C, Eureka (80.0°N/86.0°W): -40°C, Resolute Bay (74.7°N/94.8°W): -37°C. Alert is about 800km (500mi.)from the pole. All temperatures are without wind chill factored in.

      • Remarkable, but not unheard of, north of Greenland. Also the polynya north of Greenland swiftly skimmed over with “baby ice”.
        This polynya-creation is most commonly seen on the coast of the Laptev Sea. The Laptev Sea often is the greatest exporter of sea-ice into the Central Arctic, because bitter cold gales from Siberia keep pushing the sea-ice off shore and forming fresh sea-ice, and pushing that off shore, and forming fresher sea-ice, and so on and so forth. This year the Laptev Sea has seen fewer polynyas, (so far). Therefore the thicker ice this year, in the Central Arctic, is coming from other sources.

  17. Of all these climate debaters, I have not seen data showing what the presumed optimum global climate should be.
    I am specifically asking to find out if there is a consensus about (1) the best global seasonal temperatures, (2) amount of precipitation, (3) kind of precipitation, (4) geographic distribution of temperature and precipitation and most importantly (5) for the benefit of which species .
    Without such targets, how would we know if prescribed medicines-placebo included- are working?
    Does anyone want to elaborate?

    • going by most alarmist websites i think the little ice age climate is what they are looking for. will do a good job of population decrease once we have all switched to “renewable energy” .

    • Dr. Hayhoe says we should be going into an ice age but it has been canceled due to global warming. Apparently, she thinks an ice age is where we should be, at least a little one. BRRRRR

      • In the case of that 1958 paper quoted above, the ice age were cancelled by the quiet Sun not warming the Atlantic enough.

    • Great question, Chris.
      But we have to have 30 years of data to define the “optimum”.. Previous 10,000 years ain’t enuf.
      Oh! I forgot the technique to eliminate some of the variables from the regressions and other “scientific” inputs used to model our climate and future trends.
      Gums jez sayin’…

    • One not so young warmist once told me that the perfect climate was the one he remembered from his childhood.

  18. “Climate uncertainty” my a**! As a finn, I’m so fed up with the FMI. How ever, their dataseries still remain untampered showing thirties and forties temperatures about the same as nowadays.

  19. As far as I know (snotel, for example, spring Sierra manual probes) the only way to determine water content of snow is to actually observe/measure it (weightbof a standard cross section volume from top to bottom). I doubt very much that the Finns have actual snow water content data for the enormous circumpolar areas they are covering. Neither Canada nor Russia has it except at a very few scattered weather bases, based on a diligent web search last couple of hours. So some sort of geographic interpolation model. Therefore not data. Therefore the new Finn service conclusions (less snow, earlier melt,…) are per standard ‘climate science’ suspect.

  20. This winter is not over yet. The windy.com forecast for North Africa over the next nine days has snowfall for the Moroccan Atlas starting on Friday 16th, followed by rain for Algeria. A low pressure system develops over the Sahara by 21st March, with the Algerian district of Ghardaia and the southern Tunisian city of Gabes both receiving rain on Friday 23rd March.

  21. The reporting seems to be contradictory. More snow but less snow? Often a deep freeze in North America means a mild session in Europe or elsewhere in the NH. In this past winter it was cold in NA, EU and across Asia, and it reached southern US and southern Morocco. Sharks froze to death offshore Boston, Gulf turtles had to be rescued when they slipped into hypothermia induced hibernation. Antarctica is recovering strongly from a big El Nino 2016/17 (We even had another Ship of Fools incident and this on an island at the northern end of the West Antarctica Peninsula – a fact that corrupted journalists were too embarrassed to report). The Arctic, too, seems to be rebounding from the Super Enso induced warming of a year ago.

    • Gary Pearse March 14, 2018 at 5:28 pm
      Antarctica is recovering strongly from a big El Nino 2016/17 (We even had another Ship of Fools incident and this on an island at the northern end of the West Antarctica Peninsula – a fact that corrupted journalists were too embarrassed to report).

      This seems to have been widely reported in the press. ABCNews, The Guardian, NBCNews, The Independent, BBC etc.

  22. I repeat, that is not snow.
    Snow is a thing of the past.
    Wiped away by C.A.G.W.
    By order of UN Team IPCC.
    Those multiple feet of white frozen water droplets are symptoms of Global Warming.
    All across the Northern Hemisphere we unite to measure this rare item.
    Global Warming measured in feet not inches.

    • After a few days of 50F here at 48N (I can almost see my driveway!) it’s forecast to snow again tonight and tomorrow.
      Very tired of shoveling CAGW…

  23. “An “Exceptionally large amount of winter snow in Northern Hemisphere this year”
    Yea, this truck driver knows. Drove through Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, NY and Erie, PA the last two days. Woke up at 03:00 Wed. morning to the sound of a snow plow working the lot I was parked in at Rochester, then later that morning driving home got caught in a back up due to a big truck that had lost it about 10 miles east of Erie on I-90. Did not look like it turned out well for the driver since the tractor was torn completely in half between the cab and the sleeper. Used two gallons of washer fluid in two days but I’ve used more at different times in the past.

      • No, because it depends to a large extent on traffic and on the amount and type of treatment being used on the roads. The worst was a 947 mi trip to Ayre, MA a couple years ago. I used 4 gallons one way on that trip. Yesterday I busted an inch of frozen slush off my license plate (on the front down low) that accumulated in just the 72 miles between my first pick up in Rochester and my second in Tonawanda (Near north side of Buffalo). Defroster fan and heat on 100% with window cracked to keep from burning up and mirror heat on. Had to stop once to clean my side windows and mirrors. My recently washed shiny red truck is now a salt streaked mess.
        Pretty sure the truck that crashed had a fairly new driver. NY pretreats the I-90 toll road. PA apparently didn’t pretreat and the Erie, PA area is almost always the worst along I-90 up there during the winter. PENDOT does a consistently bad job up there IMO and that is based on a heck of a lot of runs back and forth along that piece of road over the years. My guess is the driver failed to slow down for the deteriorating road conditions once he crossed from NY to PA. I never topped 50 mph along there until I got to the I-79 interchange where conditions improved considerably and continued to do so until by the time I got to the Ohio line the road was clear and dry.

  24. There is one pixel of snow free area in Manitoba, Canada. I would like to know where, cause it’s damn cold and snowy in Winnipeg!!

  25. The FMI is partially corrupted by Warmists. But, as I have mentioned before, it’s pages in Finnish are different than those in English. The reason is apparently that they can not lie (too much…)to the Finnish people, it would be highly illegal. So, if someone wants to see that the Arctic has not warmed twice the rest of the globe, try Google “Ilmatieteen Laitos” (FMI), there “ilmasto” (climate), then “vuositilastot” (yearly data) ,and there “vuosikeskilämpötilat Helsingissä ja Sodankylässä” (yearly average temperatures in Helsinki and Sodankylä) graph.Sodankylä is as “Arctic” as can be. Most of the Arctic is the same story…

  26. However, they are a reminder of how climate uncertainty has increased, and interesting confession given the amount of computing power they now have and right in-line with the reality that still cannot give a weather forecast worth a dam for more than 72 hours ahead .
    And this is ‘settled science ‘

Comments are closed.