2001 15.2.4.1.2.4. Ice Storms
Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms
http://observatory.ph/resources/IPCC/TAR/wg2/569.htm#1524123
IPCC Draft 1995
shrinking snow cover in winter
Does the IPCC ever get anything right?
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
Recent Comments
- Jack the Insider on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- Bruce of Newcastle on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- Bob G on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- Gamecock on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- arn on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- oeman50 on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- D. Boss on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- arn on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
- arn on “Gender-responsive climate action”
- Greg in NZ on Bicycles Can End Bad Weather
Steve – what is the trend like only using data through 2006?
-Scott
Why stop at 2006? Why not start the trend line at 1981? The longer the period covered the better, don’t you agree.
I want to know if it was negative before the last IPCC report. Basically, I don’t think there’s much special in predicting that the current trend continues (unless one gets more specific), and so I wanted to know what the trend was through 2006. Note that right after the IPCC report snowcover increased dramatically.
-Scott
Oh crap, that quote wasn’t from 2007. Try the trendline with the end point the year before the report came out.
-Scott
Hi Scott,
As you can see the IPCC focked up. As usual. No matter where you start the recent 10 years are within average or above.
There is no global warming signal to be seen.
Their forecast was only good for 10 years…………..
From the above link ipcc
The same applies to house fires, earthquakes, tsunamis, car crashes, prolonged blizzards, etc. I can’t say the same thing for heatwaves. 😉
But the models now are SO much better than they were in 1995. Back in 1995, we thought CO2 was producing just warming. Now we know it is totally responsible for anything less than letter perfect weather!
Andy,
These climate bandits can see the writing on the wall. The failure of Hansen 1988 and the lack of warming for over a decade is getting them very nervous.
It has been snowing all day at Lake Tahoe, sometimes heavily. The current temp there is 28. Also snowing in parts of Nevada. Cold weather with more on and off snow the next couple days at least.
Very odd weather pattern, probably more heavy rain, possible flooding in the east and central states over the next week. All CO2 related, of course.
Get with the program! It’s no longer global warming but climate disruptiveness or whatever the new term is. Disruptiveness! Or disruptivity. The cold you feel is in fact strong heat. 🙂
Irritable Climate Syndrome
Since global warming isn’t selling, we are now we are supposed to feel guilty about our carbon footprint every time there is a storm. Then if we don’t get the storm, we are supposed to feel guilty about the dryness.
Funny thing is here in Australia, our winter snow season doesnt officially start until mid June and some our of ski fields have 20cm of snow already, and this is on the back of a generally cooler summer for eastern Australia.
Good thing about it is more people are now questionning the whole “climate change” issue.
Former “alarmist” scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/15/former-alarmist-scientist-says-anthropogenic-global-warming-agw-based-on-false-science/
I aint Fooling on the Global Cooling
By Joe Bastardi
http://www.weatherbell.com/jb/?p=1843
Robert Ashworth, Nasif Nahle and Hans Schreuder: Gore had Cause and Effect Reversed
In Al Gore’s presentation of his “Inconvenient Truth” documentary, he conveniently separated the Vostok Ice core temperature and CO2 graphs so you could not see which came first, a warming spike or a CO2 spike. He said that a CO2 spike came first but alas, it was the just the opposite as shown in the Vostok Ice Core graph above.
When both lines are combined on one graph, suitably enlarged and viewed in the correct direction from left to right, it is clearly seen that a warming spike always comes first (blue line) followed by a CO2 increase (red line) some 800 years later.
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=7688
Yeah, the IPCC really nailed it.
With the track record the UN has I don’t see a reason to trust them.
So much joking around. Y’all won’t think AGW is so funny when the atmosphere reaches “Death Point” and all the CO2 flash-freezes.
…Oh, never mind. My over the shoulder reader just told me that Battlestar Galactica was not a documentary… bummer.