Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The frantic public efforts to “correct” President Trump’s tweets every time he trolls the warmists are revealing.
US government scientists correct Trump over climate change statements: ‘Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening’
President’s outburst follows number of recent tweets gleefully disregarding scientific consensus
Tom Embury-Dennis
Chris Riotta…
Experts were quickly forced to correct the president online, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a government research agency which simply tweeted the statement, “Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.”
…
In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded. In coming days, expected to get even colder. People can’t last outside even for minutes. What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 29, 2019
Responding to Mr Trump on Twitter, Jonathan Foley, an environmental scientist at the California Academy of Sciences, said: “You knew this was going to happen. It’s cold in less than 1% of the planet for a few days, so the long term warming and destabilization of a planet’s entire climate system must not be true.
“In related news, Trump had a Big Mac today, so there is no such thing as global hunger.”
Winter storms don't prove that global warming isn't happening. https://t.co/LDqfq4JH9n pic.twitter.com/ndmLD637Cb
— NOAA Climate.gov (@NOAAClimate) January 29, 2019
…
NOAA’s claim that warm ocean temperatures cause more snowfall is a bit of a turnaround from all the end of snow predictions we’ve heard over the years.
NOAA’s explanation also leaves out a little, such as an explanation of why the heat from the warmer oceans is being lost in transit.
I just tried to check the great climat science of NOAA:
– I heated water in the kitchen and went to the living room to see if it was snowing.
Instead, my living room thermometer showed an increase in temperature … 🙁
What a desappointment !
When you peddle propaganda you must constantly nip at the heals of the truth.
Truth bomb!
Remember the kettle is just making it wetter you then have to summon the climate unicorn and get him to fly around to make the wetter into cold.
The heat is hiding in the kettle!
I do not understand what this tweet is trying to say: “Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.”
Also, can someone point me to empirically grounded articles linking CO2 increases and/or AGW to extreme temperatures. The NYT seems to believe there is a connection.
Attempts have been made to cherry pick an increase in temperature variability, but most good research (i.e. Pielke) shows no statistical increase. Somehow, it has become an accepted fact among media and politicians that there is. I wish Trump would cite some actual hard data in his trolls.
It’s a tweet. Very space limited.
It is the double negative that I have difficulty with difficult.
“Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.” ==> Winter storms prove global warming is happening!!
This is not Trump’s clumsy syntax but the syntax of NOAA scientists/spokesperson.
not (A implies (not B))
is not the same as
A implies B
Doug
No point. Alarmists don’t listen to facts. Trolling is more effective with them as it’s all they understand.
bernie1815
I have asked this question of Kym but Dim (first post of the day) on two occasions now. Still no answer.
I thought it was Climate Change, Climate Disruption…….. Global Warming went out a long time ago.
Wasn’t it extreme weather .. I agree it is hard to keep up.
It must be ‘global warming’ again, the name game coming full circle.
Trump’s trying to get ahead of the game, hence global “waming”. If it is getting colder it’s no longer because of global warming, climate change or climate weirding. It’s because of global “waming”. On the other hand if it gets warmer, it’s also because of global waming. Even if it dangerously stays the same, it can still be blamed on global waming.
Trump is playing chess against opponents playing checkers.
How brave of them.
“Ain’t a fit night out ffor man nor beast.” W. C. Fields in The Fatal Glass of Beer
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening. ”
…and no amount of colored squiggly lines prove that it IS happening.
Andrew
Let me recap this:
when its cold outside its weather and when its warm outside it is global warming?
/sarc
Precisely. Summer storms prove..something or other… about global warming, but winter storms… don’t.
They love to have their cake and eat it.
Do you know that the ‘cake’ in that quote is actually chimney-coke carbon?
I suspect the cake is actually cow pie. It’s all they deal in.
I think you meant “male bovine pie.”
“‘cake’ in that quote is actually chimney-coke carbon” So does eating that “cake” sequester the carbon? Asking for a friend.
Only “cake” we need is yellow cake – nuclear power will address the concerns about CO2-driven warming (if there is any CO2 warming) and provide base load power to prevent anybody crazy enough to invest in wind/solar from destroying the grid.
No, Doug, I didn’t know that. Is there a story to match it with the phrase?
I think there has been some kind of consensus that “when its cold outside it’s global warming and when its warm outside it’s global warming and when it’s just right it’s global warming.” LOL
A recent study by SOHN Geneva confirms that the earth is still too cold. Since cold weather kills twenty times as many people as hot weather does, the scientists determined that the perfect temperature of the earth is precisely 6.3069°C hotter. The study also points out that the polar regions of the earth need more warming, while the equator is only slightly too cold. In order to correct the imbalance, the remaining fossil fuels of earth must be quickly consumed in order to increase the safety and productivity of our home planet. Of course, when all fossil fuels are consumed, we must find other ways to warm ourselves and keep our planet fertile. For now, have barbecues every weekend, drive your ICE powered vehicles as much as possible and thank your lucky stars that you live in a free country.
Mike
I appreciate your enthusiasm, but the actual ratios for cold v.s. hot are between 8:1 (Canada) and 16:1 (China). My reference on this is Gasparrini, et al 2015 which was ostensibly a look at heat-related deaths. But he and the team found that cold-related deaths were far more frequent even in developed countries.
Heat kills. Colds kill far more. If you have citation for 20:1 I’d appreciate you posting it.
https://canadafreepress.com/article/more-deaths-from-cold-weather-than-hot-weather
You left out and if we aren’t measuring anything there it’s changing according to the models and it’s global warming.
I am hoping that when it is hot out and the alarmists start going on about Global Warming, Trump will re-tweet this.
This just in:
NASA says, “global warming isn’t happening”.
C’mon, that’s an exact quote. Call it John’s missing “…” trick.
I thought “dowdifying” quotes was the exclusive province of the NYT and Mo Dowd. 😉
I agree with NASA that “… global warming isn’t happening.” However, if it is, it sure isn’t an emergency.
Pavlov had a harder time making his dogs salivate than Trump does with the media.
That is why President Trump goes to FB and Twitter land..Save money, cut out the “Fake News” middleman… lol
Apparently he also has a knack for getting under the skin of NOAA scientists. This only goes to prove the time tested, axiom (that I just made up) that:
Donald probably had a good laugh at Jonathan Foley’s over-reaction to his sarcastic Twitter.
The difference is dogs salivate the media has rabid froth.
“Experts were quickly forced to correct the president online,”
Who exactly threarened to burn down their house and shag their dog if they didn’t get on DOTUS’s case *right now*??
What they mean by “forced” is “could not help themselves”…
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening. ”
It seems like only yesterday that Obama’s WH science adviser John Holdren was speaking from the WH podium saying that bad winter storms are caused by global warming and science says so.
I’m with you resource guy. The least qualified science advisor in history came on television and tried to “science-splain” how the polar vortex was dipping farther south these days because we drive SUVs and if we just allowed the government to steal more of our wages he could fix it.
As Trump likes to say…
..You are FIRED ! D’OH !
Not just “scientists” to the messaging rescue but also knee jerk media outlets. That suggests direct connections not just random commentary.
Correlation is not causation. 😉
The same media ecosystem also lit up across the country in the weeks and months leading up to Obama’s signing of the Paris “Agreement” Non-Treaty. Street money talks, especially nowadays in the financially struggling local media groups.
That’s not exactly correct Ed. Correlation of factors doesnt necessarily reflect causation, but you damned well better HAVE correlation to whatever is supposed to be the causation. Since you raise it, your comment couldnt be more apropos to the arguement that CO2 causes a warming atmosphere. Temperatures have gone up with declining CO2 and gone down with rising CO2 in the past.
For much of the 20th century women’s hemlines have risen and fallen with copper prices!
President Trump may not be a “climate scientist” but there’s nothing wrong with his B.S. detector.
+10
He seems to do a better job than most AGW peer reviewers.
NASA was hollowed out by Al Gore when he was on the Science and Technology Committee in Congress. He went into overdrive on reorienting it toward Climate Change when he was VP. A failed politician who couldn’t get elected dog catcher in his home state continues to haunt our country.
It wasn’t Florida that cost him the Presidency. It was the electoral votes of his home state that went overwhelmingly for his opponent. We know Al very well
We do know Al, but when I read your comment, I thought you had written AI which, of course, is artificial intelligence. Isn’t funny that a piece of a serif can make the difference between intelligence and stupidity?
If he had any intelligence it would be considered artificial. You should see the damage Al did when he convinced our Governor to go all in on the “Green Supply Chain” concept. Massive subsidies to companies that failed. When I write failed I mean each and every piece collapsed costing rate and tax payers many millions of dollars. Really an object lesson that hasn’t been examined in depth as it should.
Well Al could use some artificial intelligence, lord knows he has none of his own.
Mike Bryant
Does that mean we should be referring to Gore as ‘sans serif’.
🙂
Yup!
As soon as I find out what a “waming” is, I’ll let you know what they meant… : )
Everyone RELAX!! Global warming will be back next week.
“Winter Storms don’t prove Global Warming isn’t happening”
Well Duh…
Nothing can PROVE that Global Warming isn’t happening.
The Science is written that way.
Everything that happens is proof of Global Warming
‘Record’ low temperatures in the parts of the USA, it could be said, are more likely to be sign of a new global cooling experienced in 1960s and 70s, when a return of Ice Age was considered, than a consequence of global warming. It is normal weather response to natural cycles that regional climate changes are continually subjected.
“If you ain’t eatin’ Wham, you ain’t eatin’ ham.”
We’re being porked by “Global Waming”.
(The quote is from “Mr. Blanding Builds His Dream House”)
Wahming, you know, that North East, upper crust accent New York accent.
I think they meant “warning”???
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening. ”
No…they don’t. In fact, there is no combination of weather events that proves global warming isn’t happening, according to those mainstream scientists. This is precisely why global warming isn’t science. It is not falsifiable.
I believe NOAA has hoisted itself on its own petard!
So, let’s ask the question: If Anthropogenic Global Warming Theory was actually science and could be falsifiable, what type of observations would indicated that the theory was in need of serious correction?
1. A pause in atmospheric warming exceeding 10 years.
2. No tropical upper-tropospheric hot-spot
3. One of the poles not warming, where warming is expected to be greatest.
4. Warming that is no different than warming recorded previously, before CO2 began increasing significantly. In other words, a warming trend not discernible from previous natural warming trends.
5. Nearly identical weather patterns producing nearly identical temperatures 34 years later
6. A lack of correlation between observed atmospheric temperatures and increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Scientifically speaking, all of these things are indications that the current theory is significantly incorrect. I am sure here are many other indications as well.
Even more damning is the behaviour of those who defend the theory as it stands. Their constant relying on ad hominem attacks and appeals to authority, while completely avoiding addressing any of the scientific concerns; their hyperbole; their appeal to consensus; their refusal to openly share data and methods; their collusion with the media and politicians; their cherry-picking; their manipulation of data (from changing the numbers to highly questionable statistical methods); their attempts to control journal content and squelch opposing scientists; and their blatant pandering for funds with unsupportable conclusions, all point to a very weak scientific theory!
So…record cold in the upper-midwest today does not ‘disprove’ global warming theory. It is just one more nail in a coffin that is completely riddled with nails!
I keep looking for the right hand swimming sharks as a sure sign but no luck so far.
Very well said.
“(W)hat type of observations would indicated that the theory was in need of serious correction?”
Superb question which points to the pseudoscientific nature of the claim that mankind is causing catastrophic global warming. Or really any global warming at all.
pokerguy
Kym and griff offline, let me help…
1. There never was the pause after all. We have adjusted and adjusted.
2. Somebody did find a trop hot spot. I can’t remember the reference for you, just trust me.
3. Come on! Antarctica is melting like crazy.
4. It is unprecedented in my 9-1/2 year life span.
5. Yeah, ancient history but what about the modern period?
6. Give us more time, we will get the adjustments right.
James Clarke
Can I add a 7) to that list?
Lack of any empirically derived, credible studies, which demonstrate CO2 causes the planet to warm.
That’s none ever.
It is not a winter storm it is an intrusion of very cold dry air due to a large, sudden stratospheric warming. The Arctic is around normal temperature so no warm air intrusion there and the Arctic ice extent is within 2 standard deviations of normal.
This is the precise opposite of what was forecast only a few years ago where warm air in and around the arctic was said (in sepulchral voice) to be about to thaw the permafrost and the melting peat would gasp release more ‘carbon’ (sic).
Climate ‘science’ is based on hot-swappable unfalsifiable hypotheses
Are you denying what the experts at NOAA have so clearly illustrated? That the cold dry air is caused by a giant steaming kettle drifting around somewhere in the mid-Atlantic.
I don’t see any steaming kettles however closely I look – even the loop current in the Gulf of Mexico doesn’t seem to be linked into the Gulf Stream – and you’ll need a few more kilojoules to boil a kettle …
Yeah, I can’t find it either. But people should point and laugh at them for accompanying “NOAA’s Kettle” with a “Russell’s Teapot” sort of claim: “Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening.” Taxpayers were deprived of that kind of quality government output for several weeks during the shutdown.
“Taxpayers were deprived of that kind of quality government output for several weeks during the shutdown.”
Nick, you are a funny guy! That’s the second post of yours in a row where I have busted out laughing! Keep up the good work! 🙂
It’s called the moist greenhouse effect and you might want to stop and ponder what stops it going into runaway right now. Better still ask NOAA or Nick Stokes to explain what stops the runaway.
There is a slight problem with the theory that no climate scientist really wants to talk about 🙂
It is a lot harder to warm moist air. That pesky water vapour.😊
Yeah but that doesn’t cover the real problem your water is evapourating putting energy into the atmosphere. Ok so now you summon the climate unicorn and say the increase energy makes stronger storms then you displace cold air to get your measured cold weather from those cold regions (so we match observed). The problem is your cold areas are now warmer and now the whole process goes into runaway because your next batch of cold air is already warmer so you can’t loose the same energy this time. You need a negative feedback or else even cutting CO2 emissions to zero does nothing the process just keeps going into runaway and we are all dead regardless what you do with CO2.
The only response I’ve ever received from a climate cultist regarding runaway feedbacks is a denial that the IPCC et al project/predict runaway warming. I guess to them, an indefinite exponential warming is not runaway warming. They seem to define words on the go as they deem fit.
“Better still ask NOAA or Nick Stokes to explain what stops the runaway.”
You could just ask anyone who understands the simple algebra of feedback. You can have positive feedback up to a limit without runaway.
ROFL oh please Nick try reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_feedback
Normally a value larger than 1 will do it but you said I can have any amount so lets immediately falsify you .. I choose +infinity.
Ummm I think that is the purest definition of runaway.
Oh btw even sks waffled thru it and finally worked out any feedback >1 defines runaway. Then they got lost thinking natural systems can’t go >1 before they finally worked it out the blocking effect in greenhouse actually allows that quite easily and walking back down to a position that they were going to settle on 0.6
https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?p=3&t=119&&a=386
But hey you can have any value … right?
Nick, I think this is an image of Bertrand Russell’s orbitting teapot captured accidentally from a space camera.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
“Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.” this si true.
But the dangerous global warming is predicted to come about because of positive feedbacks that cause an acceleration in the warming.
Winter storms do prove global warming isn’t happening at a dangerous rate.
Increase in evaporation from the ocean surface into the air from local air temperature increases results in increased cloud cover, which diverts more of the sun’s heat back into space. The feedback loop is not positive.
If it were, we would not have the luxury of posting ideas about it on the internet at the present time. There would be no end to the heat, and the “humanly inhabitable areas” of the earth would have succumbed to it long before we got here.
There were negative feedbacks that helped the earth out of the last great ice age. Polar caps reflected sun back into space, but there was so much less cloud cover, that mid latitude heat absorption eventually warmed the earth back up to where it is now.
If you think there is a positive feedback process in play at this time, then we are balancing ourselves on the top of an overinflated basketball. Only perfectly timed and proper force corrections could keep us from real calamity. This is where the Green Initiative folks are at. Gymnastics are needed, now.
I don’t think winter storms prove or disprove anything. Neither do heat waves.
The only thing Crispin, with Catastrophic AGW after 40 years, shouldn’t the edge have been taken off the cold events? We shouldnt be recording new record cold as frequently as new record heat at least. Nothing has been proven one way or the other. But with the meme invented by a Canadian communist highschool drop out, it seems a perfect analogy to Bertrand Russell’s orbitting tiny teapot.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
The end is nigh
In Chicago at least. The Obama city can’t wait for the Cortez’s 12 year Armageddon it may not fry but might freeze, which I’m told it is slightly less painful way to go.
Seriously, my sympathy is with the Chicago population despite my family’s unhappy links with that city.
Vuk,
Misery loves company…
https://www.weather.gov/lot/weatherstory
The end is Nye. 😉
So, if I’ve got this right, according to NOAA, severe cold in Europe and North America are not evidence against the Global Warming Hypothesis. Therefore, mild, warm winters cannot be used as evidence for Global Warming either.
Canada and Poland are noted as leaders in reducing air pollution-
“The GBD report compares data from 2007 to 2017 and provides + or – percentages. For Canada, the drop in the “air pollution” risk factor was negative 17.5% and appears to be one of the biggest drops of any country. Surprisingly, Poland which gets 80% of its electricity from coal, shows a drop of 14.4%. China was up by 1.7% whereas India was down 2.7% and the USA by 5%. Germany (the bastion of renewable energy) was down by only 2.7%. This data suggests Canada is a leader in reducing air pollution.”
https://parkergallantenergyperspectivesblog.wordpress.com/2019/01/14/is-it-time-for-canada-to-claim-environmental-hero-status/
The report indicates the need to reduce FF use-
“As one would expect, the Review says a lot about GHGs and climate change, and laid out reputed accomplishments and future plans. The Review also lectures us, telling us to use less: “The best energy is the energy we do not use. By doing more with less, Canadians can significantly reduce GHG emissions, save money, improve their environment and make their homes more comfortable.””
“Minneapolis hit with -51 degree wind chills as polar vortex grips Midwest”
https://www.foxnews.com/us/deadly-polar-vortex-blasts-midwest-with-record-breaking-cold-forecasters-warn-to-minimize-talking-outdoors
Born in Manitoba to the north of Minneapolis, we used to call it the Wimp Chill factor. Of course in Manitoba, men were men and the women loved it. At least that’s what I learned in my women’s studies. But I understand this isn’t so anymore!
Well I suppose it gives all those government “scientists” something to do whilst their at home waiting for things to open up again.
James Bull
The government is fully open currently.
R Shearer
Except the post office, which contrary to their reputation, is put off by cold weather.
Neither rain nor sleet nor…
Well, it is pretty cold, after all…
Neither rain nor sleet nor …
That was before they unionized.
I hadn’t noticed … either way.
I agree. There is no global waming, no global warming to speak of, no warning necessary… plenty of cold warnings about, though.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cold+kills+more+than+heat&t=ipad&ia=web
no waning necessary… plenty of cold wanings about, though.
There…
“You knew this was going to happen. It’s cold in less than 1% of the planet for a few days, so the long term warming and destabilization of a planet’s entire climate system must not be true.”
Yeah, and we also know that every time it gets hot, or every time it rains (or doesn’t), and every time there’s a hurricane, a tornado, an earthquake, a volcanic eruption, or whatever… ‘Climate Scientists’ tell us it’s climate change.
Good for President Trump. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. His tweet is making the alarmists highlight the stupidity of their own arguments.
“His tweet is making the alarmists highlight the stupidity of their own arguments.”
BINGO!
I believe it is unusually cold in all of N. America and also Europe. Is that only 1% of the land surface?
john
We have had a few snowflakes in the SE of England where I live (no, the type that fall from the sky, not the other type) some of the rest of the country has some snow, nothing dramatic, just normal for a British winter over the last 30 years in my experience.
I was getting ready to ask you what you used to drive off the snowflakes.
It is presently warm in Moscow.
Louis, that’s right on! I’ve detected a considerable loss of heart and growing moodiness among once jolly climateers every time they are in the ridiculous situation of having to defend the meme when its 40 below. Their testiness is a ‘tell’. They’re pushing back against a niggling suspicion in their own minds that is whispering to them how silly it sounds.
And all the experts who believe climate change is caused by increased levels of CO2, still drive cars and fly on airplanes.
And, Al spore gore did not ride his bike today.
In related news, the forecast high for Venice FL (60F) is 72F higher than the forecast high for Chicago (-12F). Where would you rather be?
…but think of all the bananas that were planted in Cleveland
If Venus FL is only 1200 km away from Chicago you could just drop the Chicago readings and substitute that of Venus to have a nice day in Chicago. It happens all the time in ‘climate science’.
Venice is 1061 miles away from Chicago. So just average the two and you get 24F for that grid.
Hmm, perhaps still a problem with low temps, could you please expand it to include the Amazon?
“…Venice is 1061 miles away from Chicago.”
Extrapolating the Chicago-Venice Temperature gradient ºF/mile gives us high of 61.36ºF on Sanibel.
Thanks Tom
Cheers
Mike
LOL eyes! I guess if the cold persists, we can always relieve the situation by adjusting it warmer. Science has come along way in mitigation.
from the scientists who prophesied the end of snow,
who could see a link to Glow-Bull Warming in every summer storm, heat wave, and drought. now they cannot see a connection to a cold spell.
At around the 2:40 point
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrgBF2Zc3mc
“do you hear laughter, Pharaoh?”
But it’s more serious. These geniuses want to get rid of reliable energy supplies and replace them with generators that don’t work at extremely low temperatures or when covered by snow and ice.
If they take the position that these “extremes” will become more common, then it is even more critical to have reliable systems.
generators? get real, it will be all green energy – solar and wind, Energiewende in our time!
“Experts were quickly forced to correct the president online…” So, the question is, how do you go about correcting something that is true, but was never stated by Trump? He made no statement about Globull Warming. Just asked where it went and asked for it to come back.
And the stupid teakettle illustration! The question is not where the moisture came from, but rather, where did the heat go that should have turned it into rain instead of snow. We’re broiling…except for where we are freezing!
PBH
When I was growing up, this type of weather was used as evidence that it was getting cooler and a new ice age could be approaching. That is actually logically consistent.
In actuality, the average climate may be warmer today than it was over 150 years ago toward the end of the Little Ice Age, but it is really no different today than it’s been within the pact 100 years.
Correct Kym, global waming isn’t happening. Your point being…
Cold is the worst kind of warming.
They are going to rename cold as anti-warming so still warming just different and they will argue correct under classical physics.
We could ask the greens in Vancouver. They call rain “liquid sunshine”.
Perhaps snow is correctly termed, “illiquid sunshine”.
Here is the Warmunists idea of what passes for a humorous response to being climate trolled by Trump, and anyone else daring to repeat what he said (or some version of it). As usual, the response by the climate nazis is violence, the classic example being the 10/10 video.
Bruce Cobb
Either he’s a really bad satirist (self described) or I have that completely wrong as it seems to me that he’s taking the piss out of the AGW faithful.
Mind you, it’s sometimes difficult to tell with satirical comedians.
Trump’s tweets, and similar comments by others were never meant to prove global warming doesn’t exist. The tweets were meant to prove that alarmist predictions about catastrophic events caused by global warming, like “the end of snow”, are complete bs. The tweet from NOAA is a classic “look over there!” misdirection.
Make America Warm Again!
““In related news, Trump had a Big Mac today, so there is no such thing as global hunger.””
There’s no such thing as global hunger. Hunger, like weather/climate, is local.
When you jump on every extreme weather events has ‘proof’ of your claims.
You really have no foot to stand on when others play the same game to disprove your claims.
But that they should think that ‘heads you lose , tails I win ‘ is good way of doing science , merely shows how awful their science is in the first place.
As a counter to constant narrative of the “evidence suggests that bad things could happen more often in the years to come” variety, I’ve taken to noting the record daily highs and lows that are printed in my newspaper. Rummaging through the recycle bin and today’s paper reveal the following context about today’s (Jan. 30) record low of -15:
Jan. 26: -22 (F) / 1894
Jan. 27: -11 / 1936
Jan. 28: Can’t find the paper
Jan. 29: -14 / 1915
Jan. 30: -12 / 1899
1. What is so unusual about today?
2. Why weren’t those records related to “polar vortexes”? Or did we just adopt a scary terminology to further the narrative?
3. Was there a little warming in the Arctic associated with any of the dips of arctic air to lower latitudes?
1. Record temperatures are always unusual. It kind of goes with the territory.
2. They were all related to polar vortexes, but they didn’t call them that then.
3. When Arctic air drops south, mid-latitude air must go north to replace it. Nature abhors a vacuum. That warmer air is quickly cooled by the lack of sunlight and very high albedo of the frozen wastes.
“That warmer air is quickly cooled by the lack of sunlight and very high albedo of the frozen wastes.”
One sec: you are considering visible wavelengths when you write “very high albedo”. In IR (which is the outgoing radiation from a warm surface) ice and water are as good at absorbing and emitting IR as flat black paint.
Sensible heat (transported in the form of warm air) will warm the surface by contact and the surface will radiate that energy into space as IR as if the surface was black (because to IR, it is). Heat from the arctic Ocean warms the ice and the ice in turn radiates it very effectively into space in the IR bands. Ice only reflects visible light.
“2. They were all related to polar vortexes, but they didn’t call them that then.
3. When Arctic air drops south, mid-latitude air must go north to replace it. Nature abhors a vacuum.”
Excellent summation.
Arctic air drops south every year about this time of year. My favorite weather forecaster, Janice Dean, says this cold shot may be our last really cold weather of the winter season.
Here in my neck of the woods (Oklahoma) it is usual for temperatures to get down close to zero F about once each winter. This year the coldest I got was about 15 F, and now Janice says the real cold weather is going away for the rest of the season so I gues we won’t be seeing zero F around here. I love it! Hate that cold weather. I feel for the folks in the northcentral and northeast U.S. A couple of more days and it will be a lot better. Hang in there!
I wonder how those windmills are doing right about now up there in the extreme cold weather.
The “scientific-technological elite” have spoken! Eisenhower nailed that one.
As long as we get it all straight………..
Anything the goofballs dream up to attribute to humans is scientifically robust.
All things summer and fires are proof of AGW but winter and widespread freezing is just weather.
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening. ”
So now “science” has evolved to the point of proving negatives instead of proving that something actually did happen and it can be observed and replicated.
Time for me to get out in the cold atop my Skittle-powered Unicorn with the Deluxe Thermonuclear heater system.
Are you intending on having a standby e-cat for backup?
Kim, I have a few very important questions for you:
What methods do you use for transportation?, including automobiles, buses, trains, planes, or bicycles? [Double no-no if you drive electric vehicles seeing as the “carbon footprint” to bring those precious metals to production and then of course safely dispose of them in an environmentally friendly method, is quite large]
How do you heat your home?
How do you power your electricity?
With what means was your house built?
How do you access your food? How do you store the food that needs stored under 40F?
Where did you source your clothing?
How do you access your water?
Just wondering, because, for someone preaching about the evils of CO2 and how dangerous it is, I would bet everything I have ever made, everything I have now, and everything I will ever make that you could not possibly survive without depending on oil and gas for those means.
I’ll wait patiently for your response 🙂
Let me help you, humans are not causing the climate to change, humans can not stop the climate from changing, Co2 is plant food not pollution. Your welcome.
???? strange…. the way I parsed Kims’ comment didn’t make me think he/she was espousing the evils of co2… maybe I’m wrong.
Kym has a history.
I suppose you’d need to know her history of trolling to understand the context.
“I think they meant waming, global waming isn’t happening.” Is a poor attempt to demonstrate Trump is stupid because of a typo. She apparently is not aware it’s unsure whether he actually is the one using Twitter:
https://www.thoughtco.com/donald-trump-twitter-3367559
Not does she understand the strategy pointed out by others on this site that it helps get the message our because people share based on grammatical errors… Ensuring far more coverage than would otherwise happen.
It’s clever but the likes of Kim would likely never admit such a thing.
“Is a poor attempt to demonstrate Trump is stupid because of a typo”
Trump’s spellchecker may have substituted another spelling. Like happens in these comments on a daily basis, and probably everywhere else. But if all you can do is grasp at straws to trash Trump, then I guess that’s what you do if that’s your aim.
Trump is the best troller around. I love the guy! 🙂
Trump should offer to put solar panels on the southern border wall in exchange for the Democrats funding the wall.
Which is ironic considering Trump has taught these TDS sufferers several new words since he has become POTUS. To this day you will still see them using these real words in jest as if they aren’t words at all. You can’t fix stupid that was brought on by decades of indoctrination.
Tom,
Perhaps if the power goes to Mexico, they might submit some of the funding as well
uh hu… thanks for the inxight makes sense (or not) now
Thanks for the insight… It makes sense ( or not) now!
Matthew Drobnick
““I think they meant waming, global waming isn’t happening.” Is a poor attempt to demonstrate Trump is stupid because of a typo.”
It certainly is a wasted poor attempt. We are way past Trump being considered stupid. He is well on the way to imbecile, not even newsworthy that he didn’t stop at moron.
@Simon – he is a billionaire, a celebrity, and the leader of the free world.
And you spend your time on message boards convincing people that cold is actually warm in disguise. And promoting the idea that we should give up fossil fuels that power our modern economy. Because there is a statistical warming identified by activists with a biased viewpoint, that can’t actually be noticed by anyone, because it is tenths of a degree per DECADE.
Smart people don’t need to call others morons, to feel good about themselves. It is obvious to themselves, and those around them, because they can do things others can’t. You may want to consider that next time you are tempted to call accomplished people stupid.
Russ R
“And you spend your time on message boards convincing people that cold is actually warm in disguise.”
Nope. Cold is cold it just doesn’t mean the planet is not warming. Climate change 101 tells us that. Where I live we are breaking heat records. But that in itself doesn’t mean the planet is warming. Look at the big picture. Here I will help you…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg
“Smart people don’t need to call others morons, ”
I said he didn’t stop at moron, so wrong again.
30 years of global waming scam, and it is 40*F below average temps in a wide swath of the middle of the country.
And you think he is “well on the way to imbecile”?
Better save your criticisms for when it is 40*F above the average. I have been hearing that is going to be any day now. And we will surely suffer for our sins of emissions!
Simon, listen to yourself!:
“Nope. Cold is cold it just doesn’t mean the planet is not warming.”
You…ah nuts you will never get it.
Gary Pearse
“You…ah nuts you will never get it.”
What don’t I get? That a climate simpleton like Trump thinks it’s funny or relevant that when he looks outside and it is cold, it means climate change is not real? I get how ridiculously uninformed it makes him look. don’t you?
Russ R
“30 years of global waming scam, and it is 40*F below average temps in a wide swath of the middle of the country.”
Oh dear another “it’s cold it’s not real” apostle.
Every time Simon actually gets serious and tries to point to an issue on which Trump is wrong, it’s been shown that Simon is the one with no connection to reality.
So to be safe, Simon now just whines from the sidelines.
Yes we know Simon, everyone who disagrees with you is stupid. Now see the nurse for your milk and cookies.
To Simon, it doesn’t matter what the real world temperatures are, the models say it is warming, so it is. His gods say it is warming, so it is.
If the data doesn’t match, the data is wrong and will be adjusted.
@Simon – What is outside the window is killing real people, right now. The AGW industry has spent $$$billions in taxpayer funds, trying to tie a statistical global temperature anomaly to real world climate. They have currently failed miserably. And there is no indication they are knowledgeable about future climate variations. They recommend costly changes in energy generation, and energy usage to avoid future climate problems they claim are unavoidable if we don’t change. And your agenda is to ridicule those that point out that their current methodology is flawed by a biased political agenda.
@Simon – and I am an apostle of “don’t listen to idiots that recommend wind and solar to replace coal and natural gas”. Because when the cold comes back, those low power density systems will not keep you warm.
And once again, the smart money was prepared for your failures, and the stupid money was freezing in the dark, waiting for power from systems that don’t provide power when you need it most.
s/he is, in her way, espousing the evils of not being a bandwagon progressive.
(also note … useful idiots that are partially aware get irritated when they are indirectly reminded that they are useful idiots)
That is great! Address people into a state of reality. Stupidity is not a state, you have to be taught.
You could but you would have to live in a cave, heat it with the help of it’s internal Hot Spring, Hunt animals and grow plants for food, wear their hides as clothing, and source your water from a nearby artesian well. Not very many locations would have ALL those requirements
/sarc
I love NOAA’s description of ocean temps … warmer ??? that water will kill you from hypothermia within minutes at that “warmer” temperature … I wish someone would quantify the difference in evaporation from a 1 degree rise in ocean temps … I seriously doubt that its measurable at those temperature levels (i.e. very cold) …
CO2 emissions are spread throughout the atmosphere where they block 0.82 eV photons from radiating from the surface directly to space. But from there, the magic CO2 molecule sends the heat to…the bottom of the ocean, deep into the soil, and concentrated into laser beams aimed directly at flying insects, but only the flying insects which are deemed essential for human survival. Did I get the science right?
Yes, but you need to but quotation marks around the word ‘science’.
Well stated. My variant theory is based on Contra Polar Energy. Global warming causes the normal energy balance to allow leakage of this normally neutralized form which will cause the added heat in the atmosphere to be shunted to the deep oceans and lower rock strata thus hiding the missing heat until just the right moment of imbalance which was leaked by a young politician who stated this would happen in 13 years. I’m told by a reliable source that the article was true but the military has since suppressed it and discredited it. Here is the reference. Ignore that it was published April 1, 1955 as I’m sure that was simply a coincidence.
http://hoaxes.org/af_database/permalink/contra_polar_energy
(do I need to add /sarc ???)
I’ll just assume since you didn’t officially add the /sarc tag that you are serious. But there is no way to tell if you are right or I am right, so let’s average our conclusions and call it settled science.
Funny how “experts” aren’t quickly forced to correct the mainstream media whenever they try to link a weather event to anthropogenic climate change…
I suspect this summer when we have a record hot day, and claims of global warming surface from the MSM, Trump will remind kindly remind them it’s just a weather event. I think he plays the long game.
THEY will of course say that it’s not fair to turn around and use THEIR arguments on THEM. IT’S NOT FAIR, … NOT FAIR… WAH WAH WAH !!
That’s the only reason I use it. To point out the lack of logic.
The response I get from the faithful:
“That’s different! Global warming causes cooling. ”
Seriously. I can’t tell you how often I get that response
Trump repeatedly breaks the taboo that “you can’t talk about this!” IOW, AGW is BS, if you want to stay a member of the upper class. Fortunately, Trump’s making common sense and free speech fashionable again. MAGA!!!
If you really want an answer, you are going to have to define “any eventuality”.
Better question. If the 2050 (or more ambitious 2030) 100% green energy plan (NO coal, oil, gas) were in place today, would it still be -30 degrees in the mid west? And if it were still -30, would there be more or less deaths, given the green energy plan (NO coal … not even for back up)?
(neither question is “the” question, but mine is better)
I think it’s equally peculiar that a company which puffs itself off as an accurate weather forecasting site posts an incorrect overnight temperature.
SUNRISE/SUNSET
Sunrise: 7:07 AM
Sunset: 5:03 PM
Duration: 9:56 hr
MOONRISE/MOONSET
Moonrise: 2:59 AM
Moonset: 12:54 PM
Duration: 9:55 hr
Astronomy
TEMPERATURE SUMMARY 11:07 AM
Temp (°F)
Now -20°
Yesterday -43°
I will not say which one this is, but in my area, it did NOT get to minus 43F last night. If it had, my pipes would be frozen and I’d have the plumber here trying to thaw them out. This is ridiculous, but it goes along with their hysterics in posting “realfeel” temperatures as if they are the actual temperatures.
Tried to contact them about this error: blank page.
This idiotic scramble by “scientists” to fall into a mind-numbing blindness to reality is bothersome. It means that attention and cash are more important than accuracy. How can those people expect us to trust them when they act like a bunch of little kids?
Sara, where I live they constantly inflate our low…..says our low last night was a good 10 degrees warmer than what my thermometer said…and the official weather station is only 8 blocks away
Perhaps the Official Station is indoors so they don’t have to go out into the cold to get the readings.
Where I live, official “low” temperatures published on Accuweather sute are consistently higher by 7 or even 10 degreees Celsius than actually measured low temperatures early in the morning (I have to thermometers outside, digital and traditional, and they agree).
Not only all their “consensus” models failed. the temperature data they use are fake.
“Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.”
And hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts, floods, and wildfires don’t prove global warming IS happening, and are NOT “climate events.”
It’s ALL “just weather.”
So when “they” stop with the BS claims that “bad” weather is “because climate change,” then we’ll stop having fun pointing out the “inconvenient” weather.
Do they assume that cold transfers negative energy to the hot ? And condensation water produces more negative energy than what it took to evaporate it ? Wow. Quite an interesting thermodynamics I was not aware of.
The whole climate heat exchange modeling is fundamentally flawed. Please consider my layman reasoning:
-I come in the morning and find that the engines have cooled, they are at ambiant temperature.
When were they hot, running for the last time ? Yesterday ? The day before ? The month before ?
Information has been lost and I see no way to find my answer with a sole thermometer.
I’ll need further information from the supposedly reliable logbook.
Is there a sort of reliable over the extend of that many eras since big bang climate logbook ?
A better tweet would be “These deep freezes are exactly the kind of weather events you can expect with global warming.”
How do they respond to THAT?
Based on past experience they would tweet “Trump changes position on global warming crises. Now accepts consensus.”
Frantic Climate TROUGHERS Respond ….
They don’t know what snow is: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/30/uk-weather-significant-amounts-snow-way-temperatures-set-hit/
I can’t believe how hung up these experts appear to be over CO2. I’ve been seeing this comment on various Yahoo stories and you’d think the original commenter was calling their children ugly they way some folks respond:
Proof of change does not equate to proof of cause. Any findings which rely on IPCC gospel are as short sighted as the IPCC. If you look at their charter, they are only allowed to consider CO2 as the cause of change.
They are not allowed to consider land use changes, natural weather fluctuations, or other natural changes.
The IPCC has never had to prove what effect changing CO2 levels have when mixed with other atmospheric conditions. They have no study showing how 1 molecule of CO2 is more powerful than 10,000 molecules of water vapor.
For the record, anyone who has to resort to name calling, such as saying someone is a denier, especially in this case is rather lazy.
After all, I’m not denying the climate changes. I am just questioning the appearance of science which hasn’t been proven in a lab using actual atmospheric gases and situations.
I haven’t seen any ghosts, space aliens, Bigfoot tracks, or the Loch Ness monster, but that doesn’t prove they don’t exist.
No read again the quote … it would be more like
Just because I observed ducks on Loch Ness doesn’t prove there isn’t a Loch Ness Monster.
You need to observe something but claim it doesn’t negate a different and tenuously related contradictory thing.
In the above we are sort of implying if the Loch Ness Monster existed it would scare or eat the ducks.
It has been standard operating procedure to describe the normal as abnormal since the “travesty” of the pause caused a communications crisis. For example, the practice in recent years of giving winter storms, names like hurricanes and typhoons. Or droughts in the desert. They can’t have somebody disrupting the narrative, even in jest.
Experts “forced” to issue statement: “You common people can’t believe your lying eyes. You just can’t. And you can trust us on this because we’re experts and therefore immune to political ideology. Yes, it may get a little chilly from time to time over the next few days/weeks/months or even years, which granted does seem a little inconsistent with the entire notion of an unnaturally and rapidly warming world, but that’s just because you don’t really understand thermometers like we do and it doesn’t mean we’re not all going to die from climate change anyway so, we just want to clarify that.”
+10
I forgot..
When media was claiming that President Trump was responsible for hurricane Frances, did these same self-appointed hall monitors tssk tssk the fear mongers?
Time to gut all the leftists out of USG agencies, they are clearly pushing an anti-American and anti-human ideology.
Yet the warmistas use heat waves to “prove” CAGW.
Dingdingding!!!! We have a winner. Ever time it is hot weather environtards screech it is globall warmining.
And that is why Trump tweeted, because CAGW believers do that all the time. Even using faked data and reference points such as the Australians just did (Record breaking Temps: not exactly, a) was higher in 19th century and b) you shouldn’t read temp’s in the middle of a city and then ‘correct’ them upwards).
And not just heatwaves, but forest fires in forest fire prone forests, hurricanes during hurricane season, wedge tornadoes in tornado alley, blizzards in winter, vineyards almost able to produce as far north as they were producing 1,000 years ago, ice sheets calving, and early springs on Mars, it’s all exactly what you’d expect as climageddon approaches.
Paris, 12 December 2015 – The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela submitted its new climate action plan to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
no food, no medical supplies, rampant violent crime, oil production plummeting, government officials stealing everything in sight, mass exodus of citizens to neighboring countries… but they are on top of climate change
The UN applauds
They say Winter is Coming.
Well let me tell you an ancient Gorian saying: When Winter is Here, you know Global Warming has arrived. *
*[ with just almost 50% chance, corresponding to IPCC level: Very High Certainty ]
There’s no science on WUWT, just denialist / alarmist rage machines spinning waves…sigh
Oh Damn Davy
There’s a heck of a lot of science here. Also the politics. You know Dave… the guys that have been blowing up your dream. We’re here getting the ammo. Did you feel rage when we pulled out of Paris. Enjoy. There’s more to come
It’s climate science to start with and that precludes any real science regardless of wherever it is being discussed.
And you believe, the so called “settled sciece” is science ?
It’s denialistic science, hiding facts, not seeing facts, not believing facts.
Call it better religion.
By the context, I think you meant “no science in CAGW”. I do that too – get my acronyms all crossed up. Senior moment…
Another seagull troll. Squawks, poops and flies off.
God, please bless Donald Trump. He is often rude and always egotistical and many times crass but he is truly trying to do the things which need to be done for the good of our country. And thank you, Lord, for keeping the Clinton Cartel out of high office.
Regards,
JimG1
Amen, Brother Jim! 🙂
NOAA just publicly busted the idea that extreme weather events are evidence of global warming.
Wow – Trump – the things he gets people to say. LOL
Here, in south Texas, we call Global Warming summer… and winter… and spring and fall too.
Climate science warms far more to socialism than to temperature.
But global warming is happening. It is slight, beneficial, and mostly at night in deserts.
If Govt. scientists Tom Embury-Dennis and Chris Riotta believe in the pseudo-science of consensus, President Trump is right to mock and ridicule them.
…
Experts? If I recall correctly, NOAA had forecast a warmer than average winter for the Midwest. How is that forecast coming?
…wiped out the entire midwest banana crop
When I lived in Illinois, the “banana” crop was planted in late March and harvested in late September or Early October. The plants were 6 to 10 feet tall and had 3 to 4 “bananas” per plant. While I would occasionally peal and eat them raw, they were best boiled with butter … and most people called it corn.
Relax DONNY!! It’ll be back next week 😀
“Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.”
+=========
And summer heatwaves don’t prove that global warming is happening.
That is why the name was changed to climate change. That way, regardless if temperatures go up or down, scientists can say climate is changing.
A win-win for pseudoscience.
In November, the Danish Met Institute reported that the last two melt seasons did not lose much snow in the Northern Hemisphere.
In the early 1960s, lecturers on geophysics discussed two main theories for ice ages. One was Milankovitch, which notes that all that is needed for expanding ice cover is that the loss during the melt season is less than deposition during the winter.
The other theory discussed was that the key was big amounts of snow provided by an open Arctic Ocean. And a cold continent. The latter was puzzling to this student at the time
Of course, the accumulation of evidence confirms Milankovitch.
And according to so many promoters from Hansen on, cold and snow were expected to not just diminish but to end. Where is Dr. Vener?
This blast of cold and snow is a weather event, but what will be of interest is another summer with less melt.
I can hardly wait for summer.
Scientifically speaking, of course.
This graph clearly shows that global warming “is happening”. Sure, it’s just a tiny blip up at the end of a 10,000-year long downward trend, but still, there it is, in all its hideous scariness.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/lappi/gisp-last-10000-new.png
Isn’tit a mix of proxy and thermometer data ???
AGW praxis 🙁
The closer we look the scarier it looks. Like those mites in the bed sheets. To a non-scientist much of the panic seems to be a result of this phenomenon.
It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.
— Richard P. Feynman
It should be end of story, all there models fail to accurately predict anything.
A true honest scientist, would go back to work, and find out where they failed.
I prefer “I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.”
How is dumping CO2 into the atmosphere any different than dumping say plutonium or radioactive iodine?
We are told that CO2 is an existential threat. Meaning it will wipe us out of existence just as surely as dumping plutonium into the atmosphere.
Which means that scientists that believe in climate change are knowingly dumping plutonium equivalent into the atmosphere when they use fossil fuels.
Don’t they have a special responsibility to take action and show they are serious BEFORE pointing fingers at the rest of us.
It seems like what they are actually saying is “I believe so you need to clean up your act leaving me free to continue sinning”
Those with the biggest carbon footprints are shouting the loudest that everyone else needs to make sacrifice. All the while the are demonstrating they don’t actually believe CO2 is a serious threat.
“IBEW Helps Air Force Harvest Solar Power” Local 98 News
Government contract
“First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Arbittier Williams announced Wednesday that Democratic Councilman Robert Henon, John Dougherty (head of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 98) and other union employees were charged by the grand jury for allegedly using union funds for personal and other unauthorized expenses.”
One follows the other like night follows day
I’m confused. We are no longer in the 3,5 miljoen year ice age?
Kym but Dim.
HotScot
“Kym but Dim”
and “Simple” Simon
Cheers
Mike
It’s another thermo regulatory system like Willis proposed for the tropics but in this case excess humidity is converted as snow and to get rid of accumulated energy. It may give some local inconvenience
“Waming”, as in Scaming…..
It would be nice to see someone to publicly call out these “experts” and point out the complete idiocy or suicidal nature of their call for energy sources completely dependent on the weather when they are so “supposedly” deathly afraid of weather!
Cheers!
Joe
Thank God for Global Warming – imagine how cold it would be without it ! G?
Now, NOAA’s false strawman is backed by their insisting the climate isn’t changing. i.e. Winter storms are normal and perhaps the natural cycle is returning to colder weather.
Nah!
NOAA is just desperate to keep the delusion rolling.
Of course the Climate scientists are right. Global warming does cause cold conditions. But it depends how one defines “Global”
The Tropics are Global, , they extend all the way around the planet. So its hot there and of course evaporation happens.
Then the Courelis effect moves this warm and moist air both North and South. It finally gets to the Poles and by then it has cooled down, so now its cold.
You see and feel the same effect in a house. If you have a fire in one room then the heat rises, it moves along the ceiling until it cools , then it drops and end up back at the fireplace to again b e warmed. . So what is so difficult about that, our “Climate Scientists ” should be able to work that out, and it does not matter to the energy from the Sun what the atmosphere is made of, the CO2 is just one of the so called Greenhouse gases which cause this het energy from the Sun to be transferred to the other gases, that’s all.
MJE
“NOAA’s claim that warm ocean temperatures cause more snowfall is a bit of a turnaround from all the end of snow predictions we’ve heard over the years.”
Simple physics Eric.
And not a turnaround, as the physics hasn’t changed.
The Nor’easters that run up the eastern seaboard are a prime example of gulf waters moisture being advected north and riding over the dense frigid polar air exiting eastwards within/behind the cyclogenesis.
Falls as copious snowfall within the envelope of cold air at the surface.
It’s always happened of course but, a rise of 1C in air temperature would allow it to hold 7% more water.
And of course, in a warming world there will be the attenuation of snowfall reaching a given level as average freezing levels rise in the decades to come.
Which is what your gov.com web-page article talks of.
“NOAA’s explanation also leaves out a little, such as an explanation of why the heat from the warmer oceans is being lost in transit.”
It’s not as it’s an adiabatic process, the heat being taken out by evap of WV and then given out again as it condenses back to water/snow to release latent heat aloft – thence precipitating out as rain/snow.
Given the air cools within the engaging baroclinic zone as it is forced to rise.
The same process (extra moisture) comes into play in Lake effect snow. A warmer lake surface will lead to more WV uptake, and so more snow downwind.
And the opposite is true! When it is “windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees”, which is what the Trump’s original tweet said, it is too cold for the air to hold much water vapor at all. This is not about snowfall, it is about frigid temperatures plunging into areas that rarely see those temperatures.
These weather patterns are rare for the previous few decades, but they are less rare when the climate is colder. They track the formation of the Laurentide Ice Sheet. So they are not an unusual weather pattern, when the Earth gets colder.
When we see these patterns more frequently, we will know it means the tide has turned in our recent CYCLICAL warming, and are returning to what we saw from 1950 -1980.
And to most of us, it will not be a surprise.
Hear Ye! hear ye! Goats for the volcano, get your goats here.
Just think how much trouble we could have avoided – and could STILL avoid – but for an honest press.
I liked Tom Abbott’s suggestion that the Democrats would approve a U.S./Mexico border wall if it was composed of giant Solar Panels. They are certainly that stupid.
Trump actually started this “solar panel border wall” troll some time ago. As you can see from the tone of the article quoted below, idiots on the Left thought he was serious.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/10/26/trumps-proposal-for-a-solar-border-wall-now-appears-dead/?noredirect=on
By Tracy Jan
October 26, 2017
“So much for solar.
President Trump insisted that a solar paneled border wall wasn’t a joke. That it was his idea. That solar panels would help pay for his “big, beautiful” wall.
But despite Trump’s oft-repeated promotion of a solar wall, there is nary a solar panel in sight among the eight prototypes that have arisen in San Diego county this month.”
end excerpt
Trump gets them going, doesn’t he! 🙂
The CBC climate change proselyte editors continue their “misinformation”. On the coldest Arctic air week they managed to sneak some melting glacier story…
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/baffin-island-glacier-study-1.4998217
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/cold-weather-1.4998394
The CBC is a disgrace and a censorship machine to boot.
I just love the smell of covfefe waming on the stove on a cold day.
It’s a coal stove. Coal is practically free here in Australia. That’s why our electricity prices are among the highest on the planet.
It’s the same ole spring, summer, fall and winter with the same ole unpredictable weather. Nothing has changed.
Weather is only climate change when the alarmists say it is.
So NOOAClimate.gov
urgently had to come back from
government shutdown
to claim “cold weather is not climate!”
What would we be without NOOAClimate.gov!
__________________________________________________
✔
@NOAAClimate.gov
Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/are-record-snowstorms-proof-global-warming-isn%E2%80%99t-happening …
Next year, after the temperatures are analyzed by NOAA and NASA and you will see that they were actually much higher than they appeared. They will actually be among the highest temperatures of the last century. Just speaking from experience on the data that NOAA and NASA have “corrected” over the years.
“Winter storms don’t prove global warming isn’t happening.”
But a heat-wave in the Australian summer DOES prove global warming is happening (according to Green politicians and other climate scare enthusiasts).
NOAA scientists Tom Embury-Dennis
Chris Riotta retort” that only 1% of the earth is this cold. Here is a picture of a lot more than 30%. Telling lies to straighten out Trump, their boss, seems a dumb idea.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/30/fascinating-animation-showing-the-polarvortex-slamming-the-usa/
Strawman: Misrepresenting your opponent’s stance on an issue in order to discredit your opponent’s position.
President Trump never said in his tweet that the cold temps were proof that Global Warming wasn’t true so correcting him on this point with the tweet that he sent is attacking a strawman. I doubt the president’s tweet was anything more than taking a jab at the alarmists who constantly claim that every heat wave or storm is proof of AGW.
“In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded. In coming days, expected to get even colder. People can’t last outside even for minutes. What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you!”
” Responding to Mr Trump on Twitter, Jonathan Foley, an environmental scientist at the California Academy of Sciences, said: “You knew this was going to happen. It’s cold in less than 1% of the planet for a few days, so the long term warming and destabilization of a planet’s entire climate system must not be true.”
Trump never claimed what Mr. Foley says he claimed. Also, Mr. Foley is overstating the data, the climate is currently running within historical parameters.
It takes only one failure in prediction to cast doubt on a scientific theory. It takes consistently correct predictions to validate a theory. In fact, record cold temperatures DO cast doubt on a theory of disastrously, constantly increasing warming.
Can’t argue the facts or logic, concentrate on typing errors.
Simon….Do you know President Trump plays chess? What level does Trump play? How about Trump’s IQ ? Well, Trumps IQ is above 99%. See Gary Forbes comment. Think any Democrat can play chess with a Grand Master? PS…When Trump talks about Witch Hunt…I think he is referring to Muller hunting for evidence on the Witch known as Hillary. Trump talks is code to enrage the Fake News. Plays them as the stupid fools they are.
DJT is playing three dimensional chess while the media is playing checkers and the Democrats are playing semantics.
Then why do warm weather oddities prove it is?
“Winter storms don’t prove that global warming isn’t happening.” — Jonathan Foley, environmental scientist
OK, so if record low temperatures will still occur regardless of how much our planet warms, then why are environmentalists and climate scientists applauding the German decision to shutdown all their coal and nuclear power plants. And why are they encouraging the rest of us to do the same? Surely they know that green energy will not provide enough power during winter storms and cold spells. So why the stupidity? Are they actually hoping to kill off a large segment of the population from time to time? Is that really their goal?