Ok, so I understand this isn’t the most read blog in the world. Nor is it the most sophisticated. But, really? Now we’re seeing where the administration is blathering about how climate change will dry up the west. How our snow melt screws the skiing industry and how all of the people will die of thirst.
Here’s a reality check. The reality is, we’ve had snow like we haven’t seen for a while. The ski industry is smoking this year. Uhmm, here’s another reality check. The west gets most of its water from the melt.
To the administrations credit, they do mention population growth as a reason why this is a problem, but they tie it to climate change or global warming or whatever……..
An easy answer…..quit moving there. We could actually try to stem the tide from the south if we considered this a problem.
Now, it could be that this year is an aberration. It could be that we have a diminishing snow problem which would equate to a serious water problem in the west. Now, I’ve already shown that the northern hemisphere hasn’t declined but rather increased in snow extent.(Subtitled MORE DAMNED LIES FROM THE LUNATIC FRINGE.) But it could be that this is only occurring in Eurasia and North America is suffering from snow drought.
So, I checked. If the N.A. snow extent is any indication, and it is, then we can say it is just fine, and has been for the last thirty years!!!!
People wonder why the discussion is so hateful, so vile, so mean spirited………here’s an idea. Quit lying. And, the people that know they’re lying, <b>correct them on it!!</b> It is total bs that laypeople such as myself feel the need to set the record right. Truly, I’ve other things I’d like to be doing. Quit lying to people, quit letting the lies be stated and I’ll disengage. Some people would be incredibly surprised at how nice people can be if you don’t lie to them as an excuse to take their money and liberty.
Oh, I almost forgot……some may want to see the truth.
As we can see, there is an ever so slight increase in North America’s snow extent. I’d do the fall, winter, spring stuff, but I find that redundant to what I’ve already done with the NH. My source is http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/index.html otherwise known as GSL. The data can be found at http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/files/moncov.namgnld.txt . As can be seen, the graph starts at Sep, 1980. After a couple of beers, I’m not sure why other than I didn’t want to get accused of cherry picking the data, and starting at Jan,1981 would cut a season in the wrong spot, so I settled on Sep. In retrospect, I can see where some one might see that as cherry picking…..so…….
Same, same. And tell them to quit lying.
UPDATE!! I recently read an article at WUWT, and I thought it would be useful to show Eurasia’s snow extent. So, ………….
There’s the last twenty years.
James
Another post coming soon.
suyts space 
Hi James,
It’s probably more telling to plot anomaly instead of total snow cover, as the large winter amounts cover up any changes in the smaller totals. I’d be interested to see that, as normally the warmist side only plots the season that best paints their story (I believe it’s spring or summer), whereas the skeptics tend to show the winter season, as it best supports their story.
And what I’d really like to see is some SH data. I have no idea what it looks like.
-Scott
Scott, I’ve thought about it, but I rejected the thought because of our (us climate nerds) propensity to see trends and fact in every week’s worth of data. I haven’t looked to see the anomaly. If I post a rising anomaly, then alarmists will jump every summer and say, “See!!! We’re losing snow!!!”, Skeptics would do the same every time it snows. (See winters of 05-06 to 06-07 to 07-08)……… maybe if I decide I want a lot of traffic here……. And then there would be the debate of when to start …….. etc. Well, you see the problem. I’ve no inclination to be a para-mutual betting site. Sea Ice extent is ridiculous enough. Worse, people would attach meaning to the most minuscule variation to the norm(if there were such in climatology), when it is quite obvious that there has been no significant change in the snow extent, one way or the other. (It is increasing in the NH, but not to where anyone would notice.) In case you haven’t noticed, I deplore fixating on anomalies. In level headed people’s hands, they’d be a useful tool. You’d have to search far and wide to find a neutral being in the debate. Even the self-professed “luke warmers” have axes to grind.
“Its 54 degrees. NO!!! TODAY ITS 54.405 DEGREES AND WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!!!” <——– I hate that.
But, all that goes out the window if we were to be able to find some reliable and comprehensive SH data! In my mind, it would be significant and exciting.(To me, it would even be exciting to find that it doesn't change much one way or the other or to discover a cyclical event or, as I posit a seesaw mechanism. I believe our poles have such. It goes unnoticed because of the horse race viewing of sea ice and it reacts slowly and isn't constant throughout our geological history. But, I think it is there nonetheless.
I know of no such data to exist. 😦 I was hopeful someone that knew of such data would see my posts and present it. I was thinking South Africa or Australia would have it, but I haven't been successful in finding it.
James:
You asked about winds related to ice in the Arctic region. As you asked J S over there I brought my answer to you here. The PDO, AMO, AO and other oscillations are long term ocean Atmosphere weather patterns so naturally wind being an atmospheric thingy would be included. The ENSO is a wind pattern. You can not separate ocean and atmosphere as they are both manifestations of forms of water / H2O.
There are some semi neutral observers in this that are only involved to counter the Chicken Little Brigade and their defenders like the luke warmers.
Being retired this is more of an entertainment for me and being a retired trouble shooter I take the position to not fix something unless it is broken. The only thing broken is the fairy tale being forced on others that current climate is somehow abnormal and something can be done to stop / fix a non problem.
Thanks Mike,
Like you, I find the discussions about the arctic more as an amusement source rather than any issue to get worked up about. That said, when they start passing insane laws in response to this inordinate fascination with the arctic, I interject when I can.
Yes, ENSO is the wind part, but what I was specifically looking for, was a cycle of directional shifts at the arctic. Something akin to the wind patterns in Kansas(and other nearby states) The wind is typically from the south in summer, the north in the winter, with a general westerly direction interspersed.
Obviously, arctic melt is a misnomer when we discuss ice loss when the temps are well below freezing. WUWT had a pretty good example of that mindset with a recent post.
At any rate, at this point in the great arctic discussion, it is obvious even to the casual observer that the oscillating events are major drivers in the ice movement. It seems to me, the J S would also be aware of such a thought, yet she doesn’t discuss it.
The AO changes direction ever so often, as does the PDO and AMO, but if wind direction is cyclical and changes direction at the opportune time, voila we have either ice accumulation or depletion.
I believe if these things were known, then it should be fairly easy to project ice gain or loss, and easier yet to ascribe causation to the gain or loss. Like I said, it isn’t discussed much in the discussions I’ve been a part of, and I find that awful curious.
Thanks again,
James
Tooth pain and pain killers have gotten the best of me today, so I’m off.
The AO is not a separate pattern. It interacts with both the PDO and AMO. It is not in a specific state at any point but like the others can be said as being positive when over time certain conditions prevail most of the time. It as well as the other named patterns are not actual causes but manifestations of the causes. For instance Solar Geomagnetic activity plays a part and its part can be seen if properly smoothed.Ultra Violet plays a part and that can be seen when properly smoothed. Seasonal during the year must be included because an action leads to various reactions. Peirs Coburn has a handle on some of the activity. Stephen Wilde has a handle on some of the activity. Erl Happ has a handle on some of the activity. Lindzen, Spencer, Svenmark also contribute their causes. It is not a single cause but various causes working together or in opposition that create the final situation we call weather. To an extent some patterns can be predicted but those who can tend to go overboard and not take conflicting situations into account.
How well can the position and strength of the Polar Jet Stream be predicted? That would give one of the answers. How well can concentrations of GCRs be predicted? That would give you a portion of the answer. Find Weather Action or Climate Realist for a link to Stephen Wilde and Pier’s work.
Wander around this site:
http://climatechange1.wordpress.com/
I gave up visiting sites some time back and no longer have links to them. Sunsettommy has his own site where climate is discussed. There was Green World Trust that had some knowledgeable visitors.
Everything climate / weather related should be taken with skepticism because like most other subjects it is based on a persons training history related to that subject.
Personal history as an example of training bias:
If you had asked me in 1973 what causes no dial tone on a phone line I could have given you the top twenty causes and provided a flow chart from memory as I helped write the training for the company I worked for. In 2005 if you asked the same question I also could have given you a different list of the top 20 most likely causes and a flow chart of how to locate the cause because of the changes in technology in that industry. It is all based on personal experience and degree of analytical abilities for each person in their own field of interest / occupation. The short answer to your question about predicting changes in wind patterns: Yes but not reliably or yes and no.
I did not stop at WUWT last night to see that one. It was good for a laugh!
lol, yes it was.
I agree with all you had to say in your post above. I was hoping to isolate some small part of our weather/climate, but it may very well be impossible to do so.
I’m familiar with the work of Peirs Coburn,(and most of the others you referenced) but he’s like you stated, “those who can tend to go overboard and not take conflicting situations into account.” or as I deem it, singularly focused. While great sources of information, they will not always see the forest through the trees.
Mike, thanks again.
James
Pingback: It’s all over except for the shouting….. and more on sea level | suyts space