NOAA: All time record snowfall for DC and Baltimore?

Nope, it was the paper version.

 

"Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. "We're really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time," he said."

And, of course, he was talking about Great Britain (specifically, London.)

Oh, and he was just one guy, talking to a newspaper reporter.

And there was no formal study or prediction by CRU or the British Met, as far as I can tell.

Which, of course, morphs into the assertion that "global warming hypothesis predicts" that it will never ever snow again in Washington, DC.

 

And, since I'm the type of guy who prefers facts, I finally dug up historical snowfall data for Washington, DC, here:

http://www.erh.noaa.gov/lwx/climate/dca/dcasnow.txt

The numbers vary enormously from year to year. Here are decade averages, graphed. The endpoint doesn't contain the current year because the season isn't over yet.

Except for the huge anomaly in the '60s, by eye, this looks like a modest downward trend in the average.

 

DC is in a peculiar (or not so) fringe area. A couple of degrees F one way or the other, and the results could be very different. What is too often missed in the concept of global warming is the idea that any "warming" or "climate change" will be uniform. What is really going to happen, and is indeed happening is weather patterns will change, with the result that some places will be warmer, others cooler. Some places will have more precipitation, others less. Places that experienced snow regularly might see a transition to rain events, or vise versa.

So on it's face, a record snow fall in DC and Baltimore, or record warm January for are merely anomalous weather events. Taken in a bigger picture they may indeed be harbingers of events to come. We will only really know in hindsight.

 

FWIW, yeah, I was sweating as I was shoveling the snow out of my driveway.

As we say here in the South, it isn't so much the cold as the humidity. Saturday, it was 30 F, snowing like crazy, and just, well, humid. Which, I know, sounds stupid in the context of snow, but I swear it was true. We had condensation on the flagstones of our front stoop, as you would get from dew.

Actually, I just looked it up -- we hit 92% relative humidity that day.

Normally, here, we get 33 degrees and freezing rain. This time we got 30 and snow. Not a big temperature difference, just a whole lot of snow.

 

It's perfectly testable and falsifiable. A long-term drop in global average temperature would be inconsistent with global warming.

Winter Arctic ice *area* has been increasing and decreasing, but Arctic ice *volume* has been decreasing drastically. Consider the difference between area and volume.

Antarctic *sea* ice has increased because ice is flowing faster off the Antarctic continent into the surrounding sea. Think about what that means.

 

An important note Bra...

If you are not a Mexican national, YOU will not own the dirt.

I have friends that were evicted by Mexico in Baja... they were in the news back then... lost their life savings, and the Mexicans that moved into their former homes only had to pay the bribes to the Mexican officials to get it.

 

Just to be clear,

It was RadioPrius1 who was positing about moving to Mexico and rotting in the sun, not I.

Icarus

 

:tea:

 

Uh, I think that means you are incorrect, since the sea ice surrounding the continent of Antarctica melts almost completely every year and then reforms.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHvrjX7AP-8]YouTube - Antarctic Sea Ice Video[/ame]

 

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_Theory"]Here[/ame] is another "Theory" that some also disbelieve...

There is no conspiracy.

 

Uh,

This is categorically wrong! The continent of Antarctica is surrounded by (to a great extent) by significant ice shelfs that have been there for centuries. The Ross Ice shelf, The Weddell Sea, The Wilkens Ice shelf to name a few. These melt and reform every year.

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_shelf]Ice shelf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

PS Not only that, I'm not sure I trust the video link, as it is published by "no consensus.com. The question is have the video images been doctored? I would like to see the same images from the original source,,I don't believe that "no consensus.com has it's only polar satellite.

 

Uh, I was responding to Mr. Schumacher's comment about SEA ICE. and It is the sea ice that almost melts every year, not the shelves. I think you misspoke or something. In addition, I think if you read your own link you will discover that the calving of ice from the sheets is due principally to gravity rather than temperature (which, I think , is what Mr. Schumacher implies.)

As to the video, the images come from a reputable source and through considerable effort were animated by your suspected conspiracist. You can do it yourself to determine whether they reflect an accurate 'picture'. Each frame of the 'video' has the date imprinted upon it.
http://nsidc.org/

You can also go here to find each individual frame and check the accuracy of his rendition for yourself.
Cryosphere Today - Current Sea Ice and Snow Cover

There are animations there as well, have fun!

 

I would be VERY careful lending any credence to this theory or hypothesis since it was first put forth by a Catholic priest!
Georges Lemaître - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Who knows, he might even believe in a CREATOR. That alone would vitiate the theory that some also believe.

 

I just want to say that you guys are priceless. I really enjoy it here!

 

Speaking of priceless,,, your ability to get "heads I'm right, tails your wrong" without blinking in semantic discussions is priceless.

 

It's easy to be right when one has truth on one's side. Part of the truth is applying the proper meaning to words. I learned the defiinitions of a lot of words as a youth and still use them in the context in which I first apprehended their meaning. The Orwellian twisting of the true meaning of words confuses much of modern discourse, so, unfortunately, there are frequent misunderstandings above and beyond differences of opinion.

To what, specifically, are your referring when you suggest that I arrive at "heads I'm right, tails your (sic) wrong"? Is it that it is easy for me to bring examples from credible sources that run counter to your beliefs? Is it that your beliefs (maybe even about me) are founded on less than solid foundations and you have difficulty defending them? Enlighten me.

Now, just to be helpful, would you care for me to explain the difference between 'your' and 'you're'? It would be more grammatical than semantic.

Just to make you feel better, I'll admit to having made many, many mistakes in every area of my life. I continue to make them - however vrey few are pointed out in my interchanges with the fine folks here. For instance, I have trouble 'turning the other cheek.' I am more inclined to strike back. Not very Christian, but I am still learning.

 

"Now, just to be helpful, would you care for me to explain the difference between 'your' and 'you're'? It would be more grammatical than semantic.

Just to make you feel better, I'll admit to having made many, many mistakes in every area of my life. I continue to make them - however vrey few are pointed out in my interchanges with the fine folks here. For instance, I have trouble 'turning the other cheek.' I am more inclined to strike back. Not very Christian, but I am still learning."



You got me there,, I confess to quite often (along with many others who do the same) writing your and meaning you're. As you know the former is the possessive of YOU, the latter the contraction of YOU ARE.

I also type were and we're, so guilty as charged. Now, if you would like to explain to me the meaning of "vrey few" LOL.

I too admit to making two mistakes in my life,, or was that too many mistakes?

Oh and by the way, I think calving of the ice sheets s a very complicated issue that I don't profess to have much understanding of. As I understand it however, calving is influenced by sea and air temps, pressure from continental ice moving down, with all the dynamics associated with that. There is considerable interest in how melt water on large continental glaciers affects their movement and how that in turn effects the dynamics of calving. I'm guessing that changes in ice shelfs are a much slower barometer of global warming than sea ice measurements.