Snow? Snow!

By adamg on Sun, 10/18/2009 - 3:41pm

There are large flakes of snow out there, mixed in with the rain. Darnit, we haven't even taken out one of the air conditioners yet.

Neighborhoods:

Roslindale

Topics:

Weather

Free tagging:

Snow

Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Ad:

Comments

Heavy, but not sticking.

By J
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 3:44pm

Heavy, but not sticking. Whats the last time it snowed this early in the year?

Al Gore lied to me?

By Haviland
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 3:54pm

Al Gore lied to me?

Oh, I get it

By Michael
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 4:44pm

There can't possibly be global climate change going on because it's unseasonably cold and snowy in one location.

I know, similarly, that around 6:00 every evening I stop believing that the sun exists, because if it was there, why would it be so dark outside?

that's why it is called Climate Change

By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 4:53pm

Global mean temps up doesn't mean everywhere gets hotter. It means the entire system of climate gets deranged.

We might end up with warmer but much much snowier winters and hotter summers. Some places will actually get cooler.

That's the scary part.

re: the scary part

By HomerNixon
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 5:47pm

The scary part is how quickly governments are moving forward even though it's clear the science isn't settled.

I can't help but shaking the thought we're witnessing a global mania.

And no, I'm not a rightwing boogeyman of any kind, so please don't even waste server space typing out that irrational attack.

(1) A look at the UK and UK contributors to IPCC WGII: scientists? Or: the 99% AGW consensus

http://www.climate-resistance.org/2007/12/physicia...

Quick summary: 121 contributors from the US and UK to the IPCC WGII: 40 social scientists/economists. Plus some administrative assistants, web designers, students, a lawyer and government employees.

This is 99% consensus??

(2) Lately the hockey sticks appears to have been debunked.

here: http://joannenova.com.au/2009/09/breaking-news-che...

and elsewhere.

(3) A global warming debate: a rare head to head between AGW and 'denier' scientists

http://fortcollinsteaparty.com/index.php/2009/10/1...

This is as close as I've seen the AGW supporters come to an impersonal, scientific response to the claim that AGW isn't proven:

1. Natural variability does not happen by magic. The energy for warming has to come from somewhere. Ice Ages come and go but have causes associated with changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, proving that such natural variability has a cause. El Niño is an example of natural variability associated with rearranging heat by ocean currents and we can track where the heat in the warm regions has come from. Similarly, surface ocean warming might occur if the deep ocean cools as currents redistribute heat. Instead we know that the whole ocean is warming and sea level is rising at unprecedented rates. The pattern of observed warming is unlike any natural variation and the rates of change are faster. Hence we can prove that the observed warming is not natural and we can point to the cause: observed increases in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that trap infrared radiation from escaping to space.

It's the first response I've seen that respects the right of all to understand the 'why' behind being compelled by authorities to take some pretty serious action. It's still not scientifically rigorous, points more to a correlation and not causation, but I dig it.

Buy up some waterfront property then

By SwirlyGrrl
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 8:28pm

Much as I love the ocean, I won't be. That's because I prefer scientific information to blogger theory and the bizarre idea that a handful of bought and paid for cranks need to be listened to seriously.

Come up with some more substantive criticism and skepticism and I'll listen. Your links don't cut that. The scientific community accepts dissent and debate, but rightfully marginalizes people who claim to be the voice of reason, yet can't verify their theories and demand equal say in the proceedings.

More substantive criticism

By Marc
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 5:08pm

Come up with some more substantive criticism and skepticism and I'll listen.

Hi SwirlyGrrl,

Please point me to a falsifiable hypothesis produced by climate change predictions. Let us then examine it, perhaps even place wagers (such as your reference to purchasing waterfront property), and see whether the universe deigns to falsify the predictions or not.

Wait, you want me to accept "scientific consensus" without observing that step? What?

Yep, like look for lots of ice in the UK

By adamg
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 5:57pm

When Greenland melts and disrupts the flow of warm water that now keeps London (at the same latitude as Labrador) nice and snow free.

Psst....

By East Cambridge
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 6:25pm

Better catch up. They started calling it "Climate Change"
(now how's that for a precise scientific term?) because every
time Gore showed up to do a lecture about how hot it was getting,
the temp was twenty degrees below norm.

Please don't question the "science" or you may have your
microphone turned off:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf-fzVH6v_U

Think Climate change not global warming

By bostonzest
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 5:51pm

It may be that our climate change won't be for the warmer. It could be more extreme conditions. We just don't know how any given area will be impacted.

Are you saying...

By Marc
Mon, 10/19/2009 - 5:05pm

It may be that our climate change won't be for the warmer. It could be more extreme conditions. We just don't know how any given area will be impacted.

Are you saying that, prior to Climate Change, we DID actually know how any given area would have experienced normal non-changing climate for any given month of any given year?

In fact, are you implying that the various Climate Change computer models that the experts use can actually correctly predict known events that happened in the past?

Or are you making the much more general statement: We just don't know how any given area will be impacted ... by even regular, non-changey climate variations.

Isn't that more accurate?
Or do you want to meet me on a bet on climate over the next 10-20 years, bostonzest? ;)

This is the second time it's

By anon
Sun, 10/18/2009 - 5:30pm

This is the second time it's snowed in Wakefield this week.

On Thursday morning we had a few flakes too, but it was over in 30 minutes and didn't stick. Today it's sticking and I don't have a shovel. F*(K!!

But the system's now, finally, been activated.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com

Snow? Snow!

Comments

Heavy, but not sticking.

Al Gore lied to me?

Oh, I get it

that's why it is called Climate Change

re: the scary part

Buy up some waterfront property then

More substantive criticism

Yep, like look for lots of ice in the UK

Psst....

Think Climate change not global warming

Are you saying...

This is the second time it's

Hooray for the lazy

The best strategy

Where's the French Toast

Had to rush over to Roche Bros. first

More sleety than snowy now

Settle down

What do you think?

No.

However....

October 10, 1979

Lake Effect

It should be guarded

Support Universal Hub