Tamino Goes Full Stupid On Snow – Again

Every few years Tamino likes to humiliate himself with the same brainless argument that global warming causes increasing winter snow extent.

Tony Heller’s Snow Job | Open Mind

Increasing winter snow extent is an indication that the freeze line is moving south, i.e. winters are getting colder in the mid-latitudes. There is always enough moisture in the air in the Gulf Coast states to produce precipitation, but unless there is cold air it will fall as rain rather than snow.

On February 12, 2010 there was snow on the ground in all 50 states. Only a complete moron would try to claim that snow in Florida is due to increasing temperatures. Snow extent increases when cold air dips into the deep south.

Five years ago this week, all 50 states had snow on the ground | NOAA Climate.gov

Then Tamino tries to claim that for the whole year snow cover is decreasing. This also is complete nonsense.  Snow cover has increased substantially since late 1980’s and early 1990’s – and North American snow cover is about the same as it was 50 years ago.

Rutgers University Climate Lab :: Global Snow Lab

The amazing thing is that Tamino’s little band of trolls actually believes his anti-science nonsense.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to Tamino Goes Full Stupid On Snow – Again

  1. Shooter says:

    I notice that these warmists do flip-flops on their primary theory: global warming, as they tell us, is supposed to REDUCE snow cover, melt ice caps, and get rid of winter altogether. That is what the party line used to be and they stuck by it. But now, with climate change, they can say the climate can do whatever and that warmer temperatures mean warmer snow…? I was under the impression that there had to be cold air for that water vapour to form snow. And if global warming is raising global temperatures, that cold air would just mean more rain.

    Tamino doesn’t get the point. It’s like talking to a dedicated KGB plant.

  2. AndyG55 says:

    Such a pity that last graph doesn’t go back to the 1940’s

    We all know that the 1970’s was a cool period….

    ….. the alarmista were even panicking about another ice age.

    ps.. you have to lurve all Bambino’s “mights”, “coulds”

    Also notice that Bambino’s second last major paragraph say increased temp might give more snow.. So obviously it was warmer is the 1970’s etc

    The poor guy has severely confused himself… and, no doubt, all his brain-dead followers

  3. Richard Keen says:

    Tony sez..
    “There is always enough moisture in the air in the Gulf Coast states to produce precipitation, but unless there is cold air it will fall as rain rather than snow.”
    Which sums up in a sentence a point which took me several pages to make on WUWT a few years ago when Seth Borenstein of AP tried to expound the same lie. But I threw in some charts and numbers with circles and arrows on the back, and some weather stories, that you all might find amusing. So it’s at:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/19/whac-a-moling-seth-borenstein-at-ap-over-his-erroneous-extreme-weather-claims/
    The title reference to “whac-a-moling” was prescient. The same fairy tale shows up every year about this time, when, strangely, it snows.

  4. Brian G Valentine says:

    Tamino “physics” leave a lot to be desired. The Clausius-Clapeyron eqn. relates the equilibrium vapor pressure (strictly speaking, the fugacity) of a substance to the enthalpy of vaporization. It is an equilibrium relation only, and atmosphere and the oceans are not at equilibrium – evaporation would be impossible.

    Who pays that guy anyway? God is he awful. Is he taking checks under the table from Sierra Club or something like that? A very mediocre level of “knowledge” coupled with an extraordinary arrogance.

    That’s not entirely uncommon for that ilk either

  5. Jimmy Haigh says:

    I’ve heard this nonsense from a lot of warmongers. Call me simple but if global warming was really happening we might get more rain but not more snow!

    • Brian G Valentine says:

      It is supposed to rain more within tropical latitudes, anyway, due to an enhanced “greenhouse” effect there and that isn’t observed.

      That’s one of many other predictions of climate “modeling”that isn’t actually observed. Taken together, climate “models” provide more evidence against, rather than for, global warming.

      • Sunsettommy says:

        How can the Tropics get an “enhanced greenhouse effect” when the temperature and humidity levels are already at the maximum?

        • Brian G Valentine says:

          How are tropical latitudes supposed to have a “hot spot”?

          Fake physics are applied, that’s all I can figure out

          • cdquarles says:

             The hotspot is the effect of lowering the lapse rate (lowering the temperature change rate as we go away from the surface). We know that IR active water does this (from -9K/km dry standard atmosphere to -6.5K/km moist and not only as gas, by the way). Since carbon dioxide is also IR active (though water covers a much larger fraction of the band and essentially is a continuum absorber under most conditions), it should have the same effect at altitude that happens when water gets added to the column, once the concentration gets high enough (maybe, since water overlaps, more carbon dioxide may get offset by less water, and vice-versa). [This will not necessarily raise the surface temperature, for that depends on local surface conditions.]

    • oeman50 says:

      Oh, ye of little faith. If it is raining, not raining, snowing or not snowing it is all from global warming, it rules all if you truly believe! Hallelujah! So says the profit Algore.

  6. Andy DC says:

    Every idiot knows that the saturated atmosphere at 32 degrees ground temperature can hold MUCH more moisture in 2017 that it could in 1917!

    Every idiot also also knows that you get much more snow at 50 degrees that at 32 degrees. It is a plain as the nose on your face. That is why Georgia gets so much more snow than Massachusetts.

  7. Stephen Richards says:

    Need to tell Foster that snow falls out of cold air not warm. Air has to be a minimum of +2C all the way down to the ground. We know it starts at -40C

  8. RAH says:

    Hmmm. So global warming causes snow and cold?

    It must have been hot as hell during the American Revolution.
    http://historylecture.org/winters.html
    And then again during WW II.
    http://www.stalingrad.net/russian-hq/the-stalingrad-winter/ruswinter.html

  9. Pingback: Tamino Goes Full Stupid On Snow – Again — The Deplorable Climate Science Blog | Talmidimblogging

  10. Pingback: Anti-Science Nonsense - Los Angeles High Tech News

  11. FTOP says:

    I have been a die hard skeptic for a long time, but this article with a quote from Travesty Trenberth put me over the edge.

    “Heavy snows mean the temperature is just below freezing, any cooler and the amount would be a lot less,” adds Kevin Trenberth, a climate expert at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. “Warmer waters off the coast help elevate winter temperatures and contribute to the greater snow amounts. This is how global warming plays a role.”

    Yes, it might sound strange, but it can actually snow more when it’s a bit warmer — not too warm for snow, of course, but not extremely cold, either.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/02/10/what-the-massive-snowfall-in-boston-tells-us-about-global-warming/?utm_term=.66ec3b980c8d

    This is completely erroneous. From the ManBearPig to Hockey Stick Mann-iac to Travesty Trenberth, the climate change community is lead by the least credible people on the planet.

  12. Greg Raven says:

    His explanation would explain why last seasons El Niño produced less rain than this seasons La Niña. Oh, wait …

  13. izen says:

    @-“and North American snow cover is about the same as it was 50 years ago.”

    Does anyone know where it has increased to offset the decrease in the Sierra Nevada snowpack that is causing persistent drought conditions?

  14. Aart says:

    Well, it seems that the Swiss are starting to pay the bill of climate change, losing 37 days of their snow season since 1970, according to a recent study by the University of Neuchâtel, the WSL Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research SLF and the Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL.
    They show a.o. that (…) at all stations the average date for the onset of the snow season is now 12 days later, and the season ends around 25 days earlier than in 1970…..

    • tonyheller says:

      You mean it isn’t as cold as it was during the 1970’s global cooling scare? Who knew?
      People who start studies in the 1970’s are frauds.

    • gator69 says:

      Yep! I spent as much time as I could in the Alps in the mid 1970’s, and I remember hearing about the advancing glaciers that were threatening the tiny alpine villages. And it was all over the press too, both here in the US as well as Europe, article after TV special after peer reviewed paper, saying we could be facing a new ice age. But you had to be there…

  15. Lou Maytrees says:

    So, one single day, Dec 12, 2010, more than 7 years ago and after two major storms crossed the US in that same week is your reasoning that snow is now on the increase? And snow, the total amount being the size of a kitchen table according to the author, on the top of almost 3 mile high 13,800′ Mauna Kea also reinforces that reasoning? ?

  16. Chai latte says:

    What I don’t get is why there is more snow in winter but less of it left in spring and summer.

  17. Frank J Mlinar says:

    You might ask Tony Heller for all the data on snow year around as Tamino shows. Also see Tamino’s response to Tony Heller’s response.

    • tonyheller says:

      I’ve already responded to that and shown all the data, which shows how dishonest Tamino is. You might want to try reading the blog before commenting. Tamino has no idea what he is talking about.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *