A simple question about snow

[B. Max]

Jerry still doesn't know that "global warming" doesn't mean everywhere on earth warms up.

Really! Then why is called global warming. Is that just to scare people.

[BubberMiley]

The same way that Bush used 9-11 to fanangle dimwitted redneck voters into thinking the whole issue should be a "war against ayrabs"

Haven't half your posts been representative of this "dimwitted" perspective?

[Catchme]

I wouldn't say it was proof. Its just that the OP is wrong about 'snow' being ignored. Its accounted for in the science.

Of course it is. What weather/climatic occurences are NOT covered by it?see?

Well weather and climate are two different things. Weather is localized and can have any number of causes, the climate system obviously only governing this at top of the hierarchy.

The climate system itself is concerned with larger patterns, i.e., jet streams. ocean currents, seasons, long term cycles, ecosystems, etc....

One should not confuse a local weather event for being directly caused by the larger system. (at some point we may be able to pinpoint these connections, but not yet).

Excuse me, apparently you did not read the original article posted, about the sulfur content of clouds developing over China, that entered the climate and moved into the hawaiian express it being the factor that caused the horrendous weather that destroyed Stanley Park.

[Canuck E Stan]

Excuse me, apparently you did not read the original article posted, about the sulfur content of clouds developing over China, that entered the climate and moved into the hawaiian express it being the factor that caused the horrendous weather that destroyed Stanley Park.

And what-can-u-do-about-it? Eh?

[geoffrey]

It's the "watermelon" effect: green on the outside: red on the inside.

I'm writting that one down.

[AndrewL]

I wouldn't say it was proof. Its just that the OP is wrong about 'snow' being ignored. Its accounted for in the science.

Of course it is. What weather/climatic occurences are NOT covered by it?see?

Well weather and climate are two different things. Weather is localized and can have any number of causes, the climate system obviously only governing this at top of the hierarchy.

The climate system itself is concerned with larger patterns, i.e., jet streams. ocean currents, seasons, long term cycles, ecosystems, etc....

One should not confuse a local weather event for being directly caused by the larger system. (at some point we may be able to pinpoint these connections, but not yet).

Excuse me, apparently you did not read the original article posted, about the sulfur content of clouds developing over China, that entered the climate and moved into the hawaiian express it being the factor that caused the horrendous weather that destroyed Stanley Park.

That is fascinating.... thanks for pointing that out.

My argument is still valid for the most part though, it is in practice very hard to pinpoint the vast majority of weather events to happenings in the entire climate system. People have theories and models but on a very basic level it is chaotic to our senses.

Andrew

[Wilber]

it is in practice very hard to pinpoint the vast majority of weather events to happenings in the entire climate system. People have theories and models but on a very basic level it is chaotic to our senses.

Exactly. That is what many who question the evangelical zeal of so many global warming/climate change advocates are trying to point out. Many were pointing the finger at global warming due to human CO2 production when we were having those storms. Turns out that probably wasn't the cause. As often as not, when you jump to conclusions you end up waisting time and resources on the wrong thing, while doing nothing to solve a problem which might not even be solvable or even a problem.

[AndrewL]

it is in practice very hard to pinpoint the vast majority of weather events to happenings in the entire climate system. People have theories and models but on a very basic level it is chaotic to our senses.

Exactly. That is what many who question the evangelical zeal of so many global warming/climate change advocates are trying to point out. Many were pointing the finger at global warming due to human CO2 production when we were having those storms. Turns out that probably wasn't the cause. As often as not, when you jump to conclusions you end up waisting time and resources on the wrong thing, while doing nothing to solve a problem which might not even be solvable or even a problem.

But if the actual cause from China is true its a good example of how far removed weather events can have far reaching effects.

Andrew

[JerrySeinfeld]

Jerry still doesn't know that "global warming" doesn't mean everywhere on earth warms up.

Really! Then why is called global warming. Is that just to scare people.

It was global cooling in the '70's, and global warming in the '90's. BUt we're enlighted: No - it's called climate change now.

That way the econazis don't have to change the bumper stickers every 30 years. (Mark steyn gets credit for that one - but it's just so priceless I use it all the time and it always leaves the watermelons with a dumb stare on their face).

God bless Steyn. Nobody does a more brilliant job of pointing out the ridiculousness of the "serious" left with biting satire.

And he pisses the shit out of snivelling coffe house whiner like doggy which must mean he's diong something right.

[marcinmoka]

God bless Steyn. Nobody does a more brilliant job of pointing out the ridiculousness of the "serious" left with biting satire

Why do you consider all who somewhat care about our environment to be lefty's?

Is wanting to reduce the risk of global economic collapse and ensuring our own longterm prosperity wrong?

[B. Max]

Why do you consider all who somewhat care about our environment to be lefty's?

Is wanting to reduce the risk of global economic collapse and ensuring our own longterm prosperity wrong?

It is the left that wants to bring about economic collapse. Shutting down our economy and throwing thousands and thousands out of work is economic collapse. If fact it will lead to war. People aren't just going to lose everything they've worked for and starve to death for you. They are going to kill you.

[sunsettommy]

Catchme said at post #7:

Climate change is a result of global warming, and both have been equally in use since at least 1983.

I say that Climate change is a result of global cooling, and both have been equally in use since at least 1998.

[sunsettommy]

Global warming is an inaccurate term (at least popularly)...while it is true, the global avergae temperatuire is rising, and no one with any crdibility in field debates this, the far better term is global climate change.

Now to what's his name's question about snow......I will supply an equally misplaced analogy.

I knew a couple whose house was chilly so they got this nifty fireplace. Thing was, when the fire was roaring, the room the fire was in was too hot for comfort and to boot, in the rest of the house the temerature plunged and was all drafty like........

....the world is like that too......

They stop using the phrase global warming because since 1998.The warming trend has flattened out.

So they went to a new phrase climate change which can mean ANYTHING.

You do realize that climate is ALWAYS CHANGING.

Do you?

[sunsettommy]

One simple question:

If the lack of snow in Europe is evidence that the earth is warming up, and the huge abundance of snow is ignored, then how can that be scientific?

Hi Jerry,

The warming of the surface of the earth should lead to more evaporation, and more precipitation. But it is unlikely to be uniform precipitation, i.e, it will likely be one extreme in one place and the opposite extreme in another.

So, in line with the theory and climate models, one should be observing more precipitation in some places and less in others, (based on historical data).

That is indeed what we are seeing.

Andrew

The same thing happened when the planet was cooling.

LOL.

[sunsettommy]

That's part of my point as well - that the climate change debate has been bastardized into something completely unscientific and instead political. That's why I mention the possibility that "climate change' is a trojan horse for socialism.

What has socialism ALWAYS advocated? taxing corporations to transfer wealth. Suspiciouslty this is exactly what kyoto / suzuki et al put forth as a solution.

It's the "watermelon" effect: green on the outside: red on the inside.

Look on the front cover of Al Gore's movie. It has a smokestack emitting a ploodf of smoke that turns into hurricane katrina. This does nothing to advance the science or research. It plays on simplistic emotions of VOTERS.

The same way that Bush used 9-11 to fanangle dimwitted redneck voters into thinking the whole issue should be a "war against ayrabs" - Now the Gore / Suzuki crowd has tricked a generation of lefties --just starved for the opportunity to "save the earth" and "do something siginficant" without ever having to create anything (a callnig card for left wingers)-- into thinking that just because a living train-wreck city below sea level got flooded, that we should all drive hybrids.

Let's get back to the science.

The notion that global warming or kyoto is just some super leftist conspiracy makes no sense at all.

You compare it to George Bush hoodwinking the american public, but i would argue that even Bush believes sincerely that he is doing the right and truthful thing. (the fact that he is an idiot aside).

Andrew

Well gee only lefists such as Gore,Suzuki,Blair,Hansen, and other well known lefists are the ONLY ones peddling the Kyoto B.S.

The president is hoodwinking the public you say and yet he is also an idiot you say.

LOL.

[AndrewL]

That's part of my point as well - that the climate change debate has been bastardized into something completely unscientific and instead political. That's why I mention the possibility that "climate change' is a trojan horse for socialism.

What has socialism ALWAYS advocated? taxing corporations to transfer wealth. Suspiciouslty this is exactly what kyoto / suzuki et al put forth as a solution.

It's the "watermelon" effect: green on the outside: red on the inside.

Look on the front cover of Al Gore's movie. It has a smokestack emitting a ploodf of smoke that turns into hurricane katrina. This does nothing to advance the science or research. It plays on simplistic emotions of VOTERS.

The same way that Bush used 9-11 to fanangle dimwitted redneck voters into thinking the whole issue should be a "war against ayrabs" - Now the Gore / Suzuki crowd has tricked a generation of lefties --just starved for the opportunity to "save the earth" and "do something siginficant" without ever having to create anything (a callnig card for left wingers)-- into thinking that just because a living train-wreck city below sea level got flooded, that we should all drive hybrids.

Let's get back to the science.

The notion that global warming or kyoto is just some super leftist conspiracy makes no sense at all.

You compare it to George Bush hoodwinking the american public, but i would argue that even Bush believes sincerely that he is doing the right and truthful thing. (the fact that he is an idiot aside).

Andrew

Well gee only lefists such as Gore,Suzuki,Blair,Hansen, and other well known lefists are the ONLY ones peddling the Kyoto B.S.

The president is hoodwinking the public you say and yet he is also an idiot you say.

LOL.

Im sorry, did you actually say anything worth responding to there?

Andrew

[sunsettommy]

That's part of my point as well - that the climate change debate has been bastardized into something completely unscientific and instead political. That's why I mention the possibility that "climate change' is a trojan horse for socialism.

What has socialism ALWAYS advocated? taxing corporations to transfer wealth. Suspiciouslty this is exactly what kyoto / suzuki et al put forth as a solution.

It's the "watermelon" effect: green on the outside: red on the inside.

Look on the front cover of Al Gore's movie. It has a smokestack emitting a ploodf of smoke that turns into hurricane katrina. This does nothing to advance the science or research. It plays on simplistic emotions of VOTERS.

The same way that Bush used 9-11 to fanangle dimwitted redneck voters into thinking the whole issue should be a "war against ayrabs" - Now the Gore / Suzuki crowd has tricked a generation of lefties --just starved for the opportunity to "save the earth" and "do something siginficant" without ever having to create anything (a callnig card for left wingers)-- into thinking that just because a living train-wreck city below sea level got flooded, that we should all drive hybrids.

Let's get back to the science.

The notion that global warming or kyoto is just some super leftist conspiracy makes no sense at all.

You compare it to George Bush hoodwinking the american public, but i would argue that even Bush believes sincerely that he is doing the right and truthful thing. (the fact that he is an idiot aside).

Andrew

Well gee only lefists such as Gore,Suzuki,Blair,Hansen, and other well known lefists are the ONLY ones peddling the Kyoto B.S.

The president is hoodwinking the public you say and yet he is also an idiot you say.

LOL.

Im sorry, did you actually say anything worth responding to there?

Andrew

Translation:

I can not answer tommy.

You called President Bush an idiot.Despite that somehow he is hoodwinking 300,000,000 people while the idiot you label him.

What does that make you?

Shall I laugh now?

[BubberMiley]

Despite that somehow he is hoodwinking 300,000,000 people while the idiot you label him.

Dude, if English is your first language, that sentence structure qualifies you for a label stamped right on your forehead.

[sunsettommy]

Despite that somehow he is hoodwinking 300,000,000 people while the idiot you label him.

Dude, if English is your first language, that sentence structure qualifies you for a label stamped right on your forehead.

Meanwhile you made a cogent point about the topic?

[jbg]

One simple question:

If the lack of snow in Europe is evidence that the earth is warming up, and the huge abundance of snow is ignored, then how can that be scientific?

Climate is cyclical. My belief in climate cycles is well known. Expanding on the issues of "cycles", my bet is that if we are in a warming now, it's cyclical. There's the Pacific Decadal Oscillation ("PDO") and sunspot/solar forcing cycles (long term), North Atlantic Oscillation a/k/a Arctic Oscillation (quasi-long term), El Nino Southern Oscillation ("ENSO") (the familiar short-term El Nino and La Nina) cycles. These all have an impact and interplay with each other to produce cycles. Sometimes, such as during 1976-7, 1977-8 and 1978-9 they all come together to produce a calamitous seeming cooling. Then, the "chicken littles" cluck about global cooling. Other times, such as during 1988-9, 1990-1, 1991-2, and 1997-8 they all come together to produce a calamitous seeming warming. Then, the "chicken littles" cluck about global warming.

Now, when there are cold events, such as record setting snows in NYC, or Halifax's "White Juan", some people, a few of whom are "chicken littles" call it "climate change", as if there's never been a big windstorm or snowstorm before.

Read below (excerpts) You should check link for some striking graphs relating to some of these cycles that won't post (link) :

====================================================================

North Atlantic Oscillation and year-to-year plankton fluctuations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jean-Marc Fromentin

LOBEPM. Observatoire des Sciences de l'Univers. Station Zoologique, B.P. 28. 06230 Villefranche sur mer. France.

Benjamin Planque

Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science. The laboratory, Citadel Hill. Plymouth PL1 2PB. United Kingdom.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This study investigates a link between a large-scale atmospheric phenomenon, the North Atlantic Oscillation1-4, and fluctuations in the abundance of zooplankton species. Since copepods are the major component of the northeast Atlantic and North Sea zooplankton5-6, we focused on two dominant species: Calanus finmarchicus and C. helgolandicus. Long-term variations in abundance of these two species are closely associated with the state of this oscillation, although their responses to the NAO are opposite. We suggest that the relationship between the NAO and the two Calanus species results from three main processes: (i) alterations in the stratification of the surface layer that modify the spring phytoplankton bloom7-8, (ii) variations in sea surface temperature, and (iii) changes in interspecific competition. Finally it is hypothesized that the North Atlantic Oscillation plays, in the the North Atlantic, a comparable role to the El Niño Southern Oscillation, on pelagic ecosystems.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) is an alternation of air mass that occurs between the subtropical region (centred on the Azores), and the subpolar region (centred on Iceland). The state of NAO determines the speed and direction of the westerlies across the North Atlantic as well as temperatures on both sides of this ocean1-4, during winter and early spring. A high NAO pattern is characterised in the northeast Atlantic by a reinforcement of the westerlies that are pushed further south, and hence by warmer winter temperatures than normal. On the contrary, a low NAO pattern is typical of a weakening of the westerlies that are moved far north from their average position, and by colder winter temperatures. Recently, Greenland ice cores data have revealed large decadal climate variations over the North Atlantic that can be related to the NAO9. It also appears that the persistence of an exceptionally strong positive phase of the NAO seems to be the source of recent temperatures anomalies and changes in atmospheric moisture transport10. Thus, the NAO is a large scale atmospheric phenomenon analogous to the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO). These developments and previous studies4,11-15 that showed the influence of the ENSO on Pacific pelagic ecosystems, raise the question: does the NAO influence the pelagic ecosystems of the North Atlantic?

We investigated the connections between the NAO and zooplankton from long-term monitorings of meteorological and plankton data. The NAO index indicates the state of this oscillation, a positive index corresponding to a high NAO pattern and a negative index to a low NAO pattern. Sea surface temperatures (SST) and west wind stress component (WWS) data were provided by the Comprehensive Ocean Atmosphere Data Set.

The plankton data were collected by the Continuous Plankton Recorder survey (CPR)16, a routine monthly synoptic survey of plankton in the North Atlantic and North Sea. We studied two copepods species, Calanus finmarchicus and C. helgolandicus, which contitute the major component of the Northeast Atlantic and North Sea zooplankton5-6, in terms of biomass, abundance and trophic role, and which fulfil a similar function in the ecosystem. Our purpose was to examine the specific responses of these two species to that large scale phenomenon. We analysed long-term and year-to-year changes in abundance of the two Calanus species from 1962 to 1992, on a large area of the Northeast Atlantic, where the CPR sampling intensity was adequate. (emphasis supplied by JBG)

*snip*

[stignasty]

It is the left that wants to bring about economic collapse. Shutting down our economy and throwing thousands and thousands out of work is economic collapse. If fact it will lead to war. People aren't just going to lose everything they've worked for and starve to death for you. They are going to kill you.

Okay, at the risk of banishment, I must say that's just about the dumbest thing I have ever read. I mean, PolyNewbie comes up with some doozies, but this is just fucking stupid.

[jbg]

It is the left that wants to bring about economic collapse. Shutting down our economy and throwing thousands and thousands out of work is economic collapse. If fact it will lead to war. People aren't just going to lose everything they've worked for and starve to death for you. They are going to kill you.

Okay, at the risk of banishment, I must say that's just about the dumbest thing I have ever read. I mean, PolyNewbie comes up with some doozies, but this is just f***ing stupid.

No it isn't. The left may not literally want that, but it does have a "self-punishing" instinct, a guilt feeling about prosperity and consumption. It starts from the premise that the mass-productio, "Walmart and McDonalds" culture is bad, and goes on from there.

Environmentalism is, to some extent, the chosen method of attack. I regret saying this because in many tespects I am one myself. I donated money and time to the cause of wolf restoration to Yellowstone, for example.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Global warming is an inaccurate term (at least popularly)...while it is true, the global avergae temperatuire is rising, and no one with any crdibility in field debates this, the far better term is global climate change.

Now to what's his name's question about snow......I will supply an equally misplaced analogy.

I knew a couple whose house was chilly so they got this nifty fireplace. Thing was, when the fire was roaring, the room the fire was in was too hot for comfort and to boot, in the rest of the house the temerature plunged and was all drafty like........

....the world is like that too......

They stop using the phrase global warming because since 1998.The warming trend has flattened out.

So they went to a new phrase climate change which can mean ANYTHING.

You do realize that climate is ALWAYS CHANGING.

Do you?

Indeed.

The last time I checked we haven't even reached the high temperatures of past centuries.

Look at the above link - climate change is the only constant throughout history - LONG before smokestacks ever came along.

[Black Dog]

No it isn't. The left may not literally want that, but it does have a "self-punishing" instinct, a guilt feeling about prosperity and consumption. It starts from the premise that the mass-productio, "Walmart and McDonalds" culture is bad, and goes on from there.

Environmentalism is, to some extent, the chosen method of attack. I regret saying this because in many tespects I am one myself. I donated money and time to the cause of wolf restoration to Yellowstone, for example.

What, exactly, is wrong with not regarding the earth and its bounty the way a swarm of locusts regard a field of wheat?

[B. Max]

Okay, at the risk of banishment, I must say that's just about the dumbest thing I have ever read. I mean, PolyNewbie comes up with some doozies, but this is just fucking stupid.

From: Deepest, Darkest Alberta

That would Edmonton wouldn't it.