Snow Extent in the Northern Hemisphere now Among the Highest in 56 years

[canada-man]

On March 20, 2000, The Independent, a British newspaper, reported that “Snowfalls are just a thing of the past.” Global warming was simply making the UK too warm for heavy snowfalls. The column quotes Dr. David Viner of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia — yes, the epicenter of what would become the Climategate scandal — as saying that within a few years snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event.” Indeed, Viner opined, “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”






Snow extent in the Northern Hemisphere at the end of November represents an important parameter for the early winter forecast. This year snow extent is running much higher than average and according to existing global estimates, it is now beyond the highest ever observed so far. Winter forecast, especially in its early phase and in Europe, might be strongly influenced by such a large snow extent, although many other factors need attention.



SNOW EXTENT IN NOVEMBER 2022

Northern Hemisphere snow extent is currently indeed very high, now at about 41 million square kilometers, according to the NOAA/Rutgers Global Snow Lab. The most recent snow cover information is given in the image below.

The Weekly Northern Hemisphere snow cover extent for the winter season 2022-2023 in purple is plotted together with the mean (grey dashed line), maximum (blue), and minimum (orange) snow cover extent for each week. Mean weekly snow cover extent and extremes were calculated using the 56-year period from October 1966 to July 2022.


Snow Extent in the Northern Hemisphere now Among the Highest in 56 years Increases the Likelihood of Cold Early Winter Forecast both in North America and Europe (severe-weather.eu)

 

[Frankfooter]

Extreme weather and polar vortex's are evidence of climate change, not the opposite, CM.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1595062619496648705

 

[canada-man]

Extreme weather and polar vortex's are evidence of climate change, not the opposite, CM.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1595062619496648705

stop using fossil fuels and their products then i will take you seriously

 

[Frankfooter]

stop using fossil fuels and their products then i will take you seriously

I see, so until I live in a cave, hunt my own food and stop exhaling CO2 you'll claim I'm a hypocrite.
Greenwashing, dude.

Shit needs fixing and its systematic, the fixes are systematic, not individual.

 

[JohnLarue]

Let me guess, Frankfooter has been spreading false propaganda about extreme weather, again

How to Understand the New IPCC Report: Part 2, Extreme Events (substack.com)
The Honest Broker by Roger Pielke Jr.
Making sense of science, policy and politics.

These conclusions of the IPCC, and presented in the language of the IPCC below, indicate that it is simply incorrect to claim that on climate time scales the frequency or intensity of extreme weather and climate events has increased for: flooding, drought (meteorological or hydrological), tropical cyclones, winter storms, thunderstorms, tornadoes, hail, lightning or extreme winds (so, storms of any type).

Surprised?

Let’s get to the details
.

And apparently he just prefers others to sacrifice their living standards, , his job of pushing false propaganda is too important for him to make any changes
He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthiness or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

 

[bver_hunter]

It will be interesting when the NOAA releases it's actual November Report on it's Climate Change Graph Anomalies!!

If one scrutinizes the above Graph, especially around 1950 to 1980, one will observe a slight cooling over some of the years, especially in the mid to late 19 seventies. However, the overall trend is a significant rise in the global land and ocean temperatures. Why can the right wingers not grasp this basic science but desperately try to follow some online conspiracy theory dogma?

 

[Frankfooter]

Let me guess, Frankfooter has been spreading false propaganda about extreme weather, again

How to Understand the New IPCC Report: Part 2, Extreme Events (substack.com)

Wow, you're an easier mark than I thought!

That article is total bullshit, it presents zero evidence instead just makes claims that are totally unsubstantiated.
A first year university student would see through that bullshit.

Pielke is not a scientist, he writes policy. Its clear from that article, he can't make an argument, back it up or provide the evidence to support it.
Only a total fool would think that was well written.
Saying the IPCC is 'incorrect' without providing evidence and scientific argument is bullshit.

 

[JohnLarue]

He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthy or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

 

[Frankfooter]

He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthy or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

Larue, I attacked the article.
Its an opinion piece, there is no research, science, theory or evidence. He writes about policy, not science.
He just said he thinks the IPCC is wrong because he thinks they are wrong.

Its as useless as your opinion on climate change.
We both know you can't argue the science, every time I call you out on the science you run away from the thread and pretend it didn't happen.
Here's the last time:

https://terb.cc/xenforo/threads/coal-emissions-on-pace-for-record-setting-2022.801009/post-7720400

 

[JohnLarue]

He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthy or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

 

[Frankfooter]

He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthy or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

That article was an opinion piece.
The closest he came to a point was highlighting range of confidence in findings, as if noting confidence levels is somehow scandalous and not just good science.

Of course, larue can't discuss science itself.

Instead, he runs away from threads.

https://terb.cc/xenforo/threads/coal-emissions-on-pace-for-record-setting-2022.801009/post-7720400

 

[JohnLarue]

He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthy or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

 

[Frankfooter]

He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthy or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

Larue has repeatedly attacked the integrity of the 99.9% of climatologists who back the work of the IPCC.
Then he picks a policy writer who wrote an opinion piece that only attacked the integrity of the IPCC and claimed I was the one lacking integrity.

Larue, you use partial quotes in other threads, run away from actual debates and are totally unable to understand the basics of the science.
Buy yourself a mirror.

 

[bver_hunter]

Larue has repeatedly attacked the integrity of the 99.9% of climatologists who back the work of the IPCC.
Then he picks a policy writer who wrote an opinion piece that only attacked the integrity of the IPCC and claimed I was the one lacking integrity.

Larue, you use partial quotes in other threads, run away from actual debates and are totally unable to understand the basics of the science.
Buy yourself a mirror.

FiveThirtyEight Apologizes On Behalf Of Controversial Climate Science Writer

FiveThirtyEight Apologizes On Behalf Of Controversial Climate Science Writer

FiveThirtyEight Apologizes On Behalf Of Controversial Climate Science Writer

www.huffpost.com

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/931156367146209288

 

[bver_hunter]

In spite of this record snowfall that is from the "Lake Effect" Snow, the actual Artic Sea Ice is still considered to be "Very Low"":

Arctic Sea Ice
This is still troubling. The National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado continue to measure Arctic sea ice well below the last 30-year average. This is the time of year with little to no sun and intense cold, where the ice cover can grow rapidly. But at this point, it is below 1 Standard Deviation.

The positive spin is that more snow across the continents can enhance the cold air masses, which can expand the cold and perhaps enhance sea ice growth.

Note: Ocean Water is salty and freezes at a lower temperature than fresh water. This begins at 29ºF.

So if the Cold Air Masses can be enhanced by the excess snow from the various Continents, only then there can be a positive spin on the record snow from the Lake Effects that we saw in the past couple of weeks!!

Snow Cover Now At 56 Year High In The Northern Hemisphere - Just In Weather

November 28 2022 Does it even seem possible that our planet may have the most snow cover to date on modern record? We will be looking at the Northern Hemisphere as a whole and areas with any snow cover. So that epic Lake Effect Snow Storm last week was impressive, but only covers about 1% […]

justinweather.com

 

[Ref]

It will be interesting when the NOAA releases it's actual November Report on it's Climate Change Graph Anomalies!!

If one scrutinizes the above Graph, especially around 1950 to 1980, one will observe a slight cooling over some of the years, especially in the mid to late 19 seventies. However, the overall trend is a significant rise in the global land and ocean temperatures. Why can the right wingers not grasp this basic science but desperately try to follow some online conspiracy theory dogma?

Back in the late 1800's and early 1900's the crazies must have been warning of another ice age. Then in the 1940's, that's when the "End is Near" signs came out and the crazies were calling for the planet to burn in flames. Then nothing for the next 30-40 years, and now the crazies are back with more doomsday world ending shit.

Everyone has heard it all before. We're gonna freeze, we're gonna burn....it's the same story as man is responsible for fixing it.

We have what maybe 100 years of recorded data on a planet that has been here for billions of years? Nothing on that graph is a trend, it is just another small blip on the grand scale.

So many people tend to forget the power of the sun. One small flare from the sun and the impact it has on the Earth is way more powerful than what most people realize.

The Planet is smarter than man. It knows what it is doing and when it has no use for man it will simply rid itself of us like the millions of life forms it has.

 

[bver_hunter]

Back in the late 1800's and early 1900's the crazies must have been warning of another ice age. Then in the 1940's, that's when the "End is Near" signs came out and the crazies were calling for the planet to burn in flames. Then nothing for the next 30-40 years, and now the crazies are back with more doomsday world ending shit.

Everyone has heard it all before. We're gonna freeze, we're gonna burn....it's the same story as man is responsible for fixing it.

We have what maybe 100 years of recorded data on a planet that has been here for billions of years? Nothing on that graph is a trend, it is just another small blip on the grand scale.

So many people tend to forget the power of the sun. One small flare from the sun and the impact it has on the Earth is way more powerful than what most people realize.

The Planet is smarter than man. It knows what it is doing and when it has no use for man it will simply rid itself of us like the millions of life forms it has.

Yes the Climate Change Deniers are the real crazies. They refuse to go by the actual Science but keep on following their own political beliefs.
We know that the Fossil Fuel Industries did the Research decades ago and really hid it under the mat.
The past couple of years has indicated a more severe effect with this Climate Change impacting several lives Globally on an unprecedented scale.
Guess we should pray for the Planet to feed us as it is much more smarter than us!!

 

[basketcase]

He will of course attack the character of Dr. Pielke. Because ... that is what he does

Trustworthy or integrity are not qualities one uses to describe Frankfooter

And John will continue to claim that science is a conspiracy and he knows better than scientists.

 

[basketcase]

Back in the late 1800's and early 1900's ...

Sorry but science is based on evidence. We get better evidence and we get better conclusions.

And the people in the 70's claiming an ice age was coming were a small fringe of the scientists.

 

[Ref]

Sorry but science is based on evidence. We get better evidence and we get better conclusions.

I agree, however I do not believe that we have enough evidence to make the correct conclusion. The sample size is too small.