All time record snow covers the capital. There has never been a snow storm lime this in Washington since weather record began being routinely kept, which was well over 100 years ago. The previous record was recorded back in 1922. If you follow the link, there is also a nice video of the snow around Washington, along with some very brief interviews with some of the locals. [RQUOTER]Washington Shuts Down, Buried in Record Snowfall Flights are grounded and power outages are widespread as the capital slumbers under more than 32 inches of snow. A prolonged blizzard covered Washington, D.C., and the mid-Atlantic states in a smothering canvas of snow Saturday, grounding planes and triggering widespread power outages as people across the region turned to skis and sleds to traverse icy roads. The storm proved a major disruption, with above-ground subways and buses in the Washington area shutting down and stores closing en masse in the face of a storm destined to go down as one of the major snowfalls in the area's history. As of late afternoon, a total of 32.4 inches was recorded at Dulles International Airport outside of Washington, according to the National Weather Service. That two-day accumulation topped the previous record, compiled during the blizzard of January 1996, the weather service said. Hundreds of thousands of homes in Maryland, Virginia and elsewhere lost power. Trees toppled under the snow's weight, blocking roads. Snowplows worked overtime to keep the streets cleared. Flights were canceled at Washington's major airports. Not even the presidential motorcade was able to navigate the city's streets unscathed. An ambulance hit an SUV in the motorcade before President Obama's entourage left the White House on Saturday morning to address the Democratic National Committee at a hotel several blocks away. No one was hurt. At the event, Obama asked after the whereabouts of Rep. Michael M. Honda (D-San Jose). "He's on his way," Obama said. "He's still shoveling." While the president normally portrays himself as a hardy Chicagoan accustomed to bad weather, even he seemed impressed by the storm's ferocity. He called the blizzard "Snowmaggedon." ....[/RQUOTER]
good point, DonnyMost! I would also like to bring people's attention to Brian Cook's hidden resume. He was an Illinois state high-school "Mr. Basketball." Do you know who else was a an Illinois state "Mr. Basketball?" That's right! KEVIN GARNETT THAT'S WHO!!1!. Another fact none of the experts will bring to the light of day: Brian Cook was once MVP of the entire Big Ten conference. What else are the so-called experts not telling us about Brian Cook, and why doesn't he get to play so that we can decide for ourselves? Join me in insisting that Brian Cook receive equal time to the other big men in the disjointed and inconsistent Rockets lineup. You've seen that the Rockets are faltering. Why is Adelman trying to suppress Brian Cook?!
Don't forget the undeniable, incontrovertible evidence that disproves the myth of Brian Cook's heterosexuality.
Obviously all of this reality is a huge embarrassment to you and to the recently constructed AGW alarmism movement that you love so much, which is going down fast right before our very eyes. I will count your juvenile little antics, in this case intentionally trying to disrupt this thread with irrelevant posts, as an admission by you that simply drawing attention to certain weather events is so upsetting for you and for your 'movement' that you just cannot come up with any better way to respond. If that is the best response that you and the AGW alarmism movement have to offer to events like this, then you lose.
Did you know that Brian Cook would be averaging 25.04 points this year, if he was given 48 minutes of playing time? I'm just quoting the statistics, people. Why won't most basketball so-called experts share this kind of information with you? I think they are kind of like the IPCC.
What are you talking about irrelevant posts? This whole thread is irrelevant. I only read it occasionally because b-bob uses your exact logic in a different context, to show how silly it is.
You say that now, but starting the thread you said... Virtually every other post you've made in this thread(I'm ignoring the one where you personally attack posters who show the flaws in your logic) is your attempt to use anecdotal evidence of a few cold weather spurts to disprove AGW.
If it is so irrelevant, then why do you guys so often read, and post in the thread? It is like numerous Sarah Palin threads here on this forum, quite a few of which go on for 20 pages or more, and that include post after post after post insisting how irrelevant she is. Post, after post, after post, after post, after post. Irrelevant.
So it is relevant then? So these cold weather episodes do disprove something? Geez. Make up your mind.
(0) Fail sauce foundation: anecdotal seasonal datum in a topic that must examine 500,000 year data sets (1) Fail sauce initial: B-Bob "loves" AGW. (2) Fail sauce follow-up: typing the word "antics" when typist is the all-time thread derailing champion (e.g. even today, see current Obama teleprompter post immediately in Palin thread). (3) Fail sauce extreme: claiming one "side" "loses" in an argument about an scientific investigation that has lasted hundreds of years and will last hundreds more. There are no sides. There is scientific study that establishes strong correlations and provides probabilities for what's coming (kind of like hurricane landfall forecasts -- not perfect but sometimes it's worth it to board up your windows.) Beyond that, the "sides" are different political reactions, with one side that, yes, typically views political discourse as one big gigantic football game. And actually, I think I am unearthing a great deal of evidence supporting an elevated role for Brian Cook -- at least when compared to AGW denailists/oil-company folks.
Looks like the Atlantic Seaboard is in for another 2 feet of snow this week. I suspect a little warming would be quite welcome among the people stuck in he middle of this mess right about now. [RQUOTER]Mid-Atlantic Braces for Second Massive Snowstorm As the Mid-Atlantic digs out from a historic snowstorm that hit over the weekend, forecasters are predicting another two-footer to blanket the region later this week. Feb. 6: The Oval Office at the White House in Washington is covered in snow. (AP) As the Mid-Atlantic digs out from a historic snowstorm that hit over the weekend, forecasters are predicting another two-footer to blanket parts of the region later this week. Tens of thousands of workers in the snowy Mid-Atlantic states were given Monday off to shovel out from a blizzard that buried some areas in nearly 3 feet of snow. Federal agencies that employ 230,000 in Washington were closed, as were many businesses and school districts across the region. The National Weather Service, meanwhile, issued a storm watch for the Washington area Tuesday, saying there was potential for another 5 inches or more of snow. Forecasters expect highs in the low- to mid-30s for the next few days, though sunshine on Monday should help melt some of the snow, said weather service meteorologist Bryan Jackson. "You've got a whole city held captive here," Gwen Dawkins, who was trying to get to Detroit, said as she waited at Washington's Reagan National Airport, where all flights had been canceled after 18 inches of snow was recorded by Sunday. The sight of cross-country skiers cascading down monument steps and flying snowballs has since given way to images of people hunched over snow shovels or huddled next to fireplaces. John and Nicole Ibrahim and their 2-year-old son, Joshua, have been without power at their suburban Washington home in Silver Spring, Md., since overnight Friday. They were among hundreds of thousands without electricity across the region, and utilities warned it could be days before electricity is restored to everyone. ....[/RQUOTER]
Maybe they would be happy with a little consistency regarding your opinion of this weather and AGW. Do you believe it helps disprove AGW or not? You keep changing your tune. In this one thread you could rival John McCain, John Kerry or any Washington politician with your flip flopping.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1427 Heavy snow events--a contradiction to global warming theory? Global warming skeptics regularly have a field day whenever a record snow storm pounds the U.S., claiming that such events are inconsistent with a globe that is warming. If the globe is warming, there should, on average, be fewer days when it snows, and thus fewer snow storms. However, it is possible that if climate change is simultaneously causing an increase in ratio of snowstorms with very heavy snow to storms with ordinary amounts of snow, we could actually see an increase in very heavy snowstorms in some portions of the world. There is evidence that this is happening for winter storms in the Northeast U.S.--the mighty Nor'easters like the "Snowmageddon" storm of February 5-6 and "Snowpocalypse" of December 19, 2009. Let's take a look at the evidence. There are two requirements for a record snow storm: 1) A near-record amount of moisture in the air (or a very slow moving storm). 2) Temperatures cold enough for snow. It's not hard at all to get temperatures cold enough for snow in a world experiencing global warming. According to the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, the globe warmed 0.74°C (1.3°F) over the past 100 years. There will still be colder than average winters in a world that is experiencing warming, with plenty of opportunities for snow. The more difficult ingredient for producing a record snowstorm is the requirement of near-record levels of moisture. Global warming theory predicts that global precipitation will increase, and that heavy precipitation events--the ones most likely to cause flash flooding--will also increase. This occurs because as the climate warms, evaporation of moisture from the oceans increases, resulting in more water vapor in the air. According to the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, water vapor in the global atmosphere has increased by about 5% over the 20th century, and 4% since 1970. This extra moisture in the air will tend to produce heavier snowstorms, assuming it is cold enough to snow. Groisman et al. (2004) found a 14% increase in heavy (top 5%) and 20% increase in very heavy (top 1%) precipitation events in the U.S. over the past 100 years, though mainly in spring and summer. However, the authors did find a significant increase in winter heavy precipitation events have occurred in the Northeast U.S. This was echoed by Changnon et al. (2006), who found, "The temporal distribution of snowstorms exhibited wide fluctuations during 1901-2000, with downward 100-yr trends in the lower Midwest, South, and West Coast. Upward trends occurred in the upper Midwest, East, and Northeast, and the national trend for 1901-2000 was upward, corresponding to trends in strong cyclonic activity." The strongest cold-season storms are likely to become stronger and more frequent for the U.S. The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) began as a presidential initiative in 1989 and was mandated by Congress in the Global Change Research Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-606), which called for "a comprehensive and integrated United States research program which will assist the Nation and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change." This program has put out some excellent peer-reviewed science on climate change that, in my view, is as authoritative as the U.N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports. In 2009, the USGCRP put out its excellent U.S. Climate Impacts Report, summarizing the observed and forecast impacts of climate change on the U.S. The report's main conclusion about cold season storms was " Cold-season storm tracks are shifting northward and the strongest storms are likely to become stronger and more frequent". The report's more detailed analysis: "Large-scale storm systems are the dominant weather phenomenon during the cold season in the United States. Although the analysis of these storms is complicated by a relatively short length of most observational records and by the highly variable nature of strong storms, some clear patterns have emerged (Kunkel et al., 2008). Storm tracks have shifted northward over the last 50 years as evidenced by a decrease in the frequency of storms in mid-latitude areas of the Northern Hemisphere, while high-latitude activity has increased. There is also evidence of an increase in the intensity of storms in both the mid- and high-latitude areas of the Northern Hemisphere, with greater confidence in the increases occurring in high latitudes (Kunkel et al., 2008). The northward shift is projected to continue, and strong cold season storms are likely to become stronger and more frequent, with greater wind speeds and more extreme wave heights". The study also noted that we should expect an increase in lake-effect snowstorms over the next few decades. Lake-effect snow is produced by the strong flow of cold air across large areas of relatively warmer ice-free water. The report says, "As the climate has warmed, ice coverage on the Great Lakes has fallen. The maximum seasonal coverage of Great Lakes ice decreased at a rate of 8.4 percent per decade from 1973 through 2008, amounting to a roughly 30 percent decrease in ice coverage. This has created conditions conducive to greater evaporation of moisture and thus heavier snowstorms. Among recent extreme lake-effect snow events was a February 2007 10-day storm total of over 10 feet of snow in western New York state. Climate models suggest that lake-effect snowfalls are likely to increase over the next few decades. In the longer term, lake-effect snows are likely to decrease as temperatures continue to rise, with the precipitation then falling as rain". Commentary Of course, both climate change contrarians and climate change scientists agree that no single weather event can be blamed on climate change. However, one can "load the dice" in favor of events that used to be rare--or unheard of--if the climate is changing to a new state. It is quite possible that the dice have been loaded in favor of more intense Nor'easters for the U.S. Mid-Atlantic and Northeast, thanks to the higher levels of moisture present in the air due to warmer global temperatures. It's worth mentioning that heavy snow storms should be getting increasingly rare for the extreme southern portion of the U.S. in coming decades. There's almost always high amounts of moisture available for a potential heavy snow in the South--just not enough cold air. With freezing temperatures expected to decrease and the jet stream and associated storm track expected to move northward, the extreme southern portion of the U.S. should see a reduction in both heavy and ordinary snow storms in the coming decades. The CapitalClimate blog has a nice perspective on "Snowmageddon", and Joe Romm of climateprogress.org has some interesting things to say about snowstorms in a warming climate. References Changnon, S.A., D. Changnon, and T.R. Karl, 2006, , "Temporal and Spatial Characteristics of Snowstorms in the Contiguous United States", J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 45, 1141.1155. Groisman, P.Y., R.W. Knight, T.R. Karl, D.R. Easterling, B. Sun, and J.H. Lawrimore, 2004, "Contemporary Changes of the Hydrological Cycle over the Contiguous United States: Trends Derived from In Situ Observations," J. Hydrometeor., 5, 64-85. Kunkel, K.E., P.D. Bromirski, H.E. Brooks, T. Cavazos, A.V. Douglas, D.R. Easterling, K.A. Emanuel, P.Ya. Groisman, G.J. Holland, T.R. Knutson, J.P. Kossin, P.D. Komar, D.H. Levinson, and R.L. Smith, 2008: Observed changes in weather and climate extremes. In: Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate: Regions of Focus: North America, Hawaii, Caribbean, and U.S. Pacific Islands [Karl, T.R., G.A. Meehl, C.D. Miller, S.J. Hassol, A.M. Waple, and W.L. Murray (eds.)]. Synthesis and Assessment Product 3.3. U.S. Climate Change Science Program, Washington, DC, pp. 35-80.
I noted yesterday on the news that the all-time low in Houston for February 8th is 10 degrees F. In 1895. Obviously, by mojoman's ****ing idiotic logic, this PROVES GLOBAL WARMING. GLOBALOWNED!
Xenon has shown why the little anecdotal weather episodes mojoman is toting don't do anything to disprove AGW. They don't even make anyone wonder, or at least for more than the second it takes to realize that a winter storm here and there doesn't really mean AGW is bogus. They certainly don't keep one wondering after all of the evidence that shows it has nothing to do with disproving AGW. Now that we see, based on the article, that the snow storms mojoman was hoping would cast doubt on AGW, actually support global warming, maybe this thread of meaningless weather anecdotes from mojoman will stop.
