snowsure
-
Posts
223 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Learn About Weather and Meteorology
Community guides
Posts posted by snowsure
-
-
As for your second perceptive observation...The "point" is that Mondy believes that GW is "a load of old pants", and it is well made by virtue of the fact that it is both bold and amusing. I will quite happily send you a cheque for 5p with which to buy yourself a sense of humour.
All the best,
C-Bob
It may be that the "point" made causes problems due to its much earlier inclusion on, dare I mention it, iceagenow. Despite the lack of proof that the site author is in the pay of anyone connected with the oil industry, explicit or implicit reference to that site causes immediate questioning of the posters creditability (At least by some contributors on this site.)
Brave words at the end there Capt! I do not wish to associate myself with them, though, due to my respect for SF. (Very funny though!)
-
The initial story contained the following:
"06/01/07
By Jo Macfarlane
KILLER storms are set to rip into Britain again next week, weather experts warned last night...Experts said the destructive winds will begin building from Wednesday, gusting across England and Wales and picking up speed towards the weekend."
The introductory lines appear to have been, well, correct.
Further down the article we have:
"Not all forecasters, however, agreed that the storm would hit Britain. They predicted the threat of blizzards instead.
Piers Corbyn, ... who predicted the New Year chaos, said he still expected the weather front to track further south.
This would allow an Arctic blast to bring freezing temperatures and up to six inches of snow across the whole country.
“One can never be sure of timing, but we think the winds will drift south towards the continent,” he said.
“Eastern winds will bring freezing conditions, with heavy snowfall. It will be the worst winter weather of the season so far.
“There is intense activity on the weather maps, but the path of the storm will result in either more wind and rain or Arctic conditions.”
Oops! (Unless anyone knows different.)
Today in Rotherham I drove through a bonnet deep flood to school, only to be sent home due to the "worst" extreme rainfall that I have ever experienced. If that amount of precipitation had fallen as snow then I would still be digging myself out!
-
ggod to hear from you Mike, lucky you, not much chance of 17cm of snow anywhere in the UK in the foreseeable future apart from temporary accumulations in the cairngorms.
Not much better in the Alps either. i'm off on Sunday for my usual 2 weeks in Wengen. it looks as if the Lauberhorn will just go ahead but thereafter no sign of any snow, far too mild.
John
50cm depth at Kleine Scheidegg at the moment John. All lifts look open. Any idea how much they had this time last year?
-
Interesting web site here: http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=4607
This seemed like the best thread to attach it to. Prof Wunsch sums up well at the end with "...Public policy has to be made on the basis of probabilities, not firm proof."
Once this is accepted then mankind change can influence climate change!
-
Quite a magical effect that a fohn can cause. I heard reports from people in Wengen who remember states of delirium setting in.
I also understand that suicides increase in an area when a fohn sets up! :lol: Many think that it is due to the ionization of air particles. It was even suggested that the reason why a shower wakes you up more is also to do with the movement of air particles due to the water rushing past them.
-
Its unbelievable that they are actually quoting Corbyn for a long range forecast after the disaster of his November forecast and his prediction of no record breaking warm year.
Has Corbyn apologised for his sensationalistic garbage that he issued last month?
All this has stopped me packing away my summer clothes. Barby on the beach this Christmas anyone? :lol:
-
The Daily Excess
_______________________________________________________________________
If this isn't news, we don't know what is WEATHER: Arctic onslaught, 15 C
_______________________________________________________________________
Palace behind global warming arctic cover-up? Chelsea boss says maybe
LONDON -- Sources have told the Daily Excess that Her Majesty the Queen may
be the "blockbuster" behind the recent puzzling spell of raging zonality.
Raging zonality is a term used mostly by weathermen and weatherwomen when
they see nothing but strong westerly winds. According to Sir Neville Biscuitbarrel
the famed author of "Run for Your festering Lives, Here Comes the Atlantic," this
is only the beginning of a 10-year cycle of extreme zonality which will culminate in
"the wind being west all the time."
Now in a shocking development, we have learned that H.M. the Queen, or possibly
someone fairly high up in the Palace, personally ordered this zonal weather as it
would be ideal for horseback riding and walking the dogs.
Chelsea manager Juan Mandingo said that he liked the weather, as it reminded him
of Portugal.
Climate student and part-time wingnut Roger K Smythe, contacted at his home in
British Columbia, Canada, when asked about this controversy, said,"don't you festering
realize it is four in the morning here?"
The Council of Climate Gurus, meeting near Stonehenge, issued a statement that concluded, "this is the end of our statement." Fair enough, but does this signal a retreat from the former position they took on the imminence of "the worst winter seen in Britain since the war, only we're not saying which war."
Insiders say they are referring to the First Punic War, indicating that Sir Neville Biscuitbarrel may very well be working on a new book, "Run as though your life
depended on it, here comes the Baltic."
All we can say for certain is that somebody has to be right about something.
more on page 386
If this isn't the funniest post that I have ever read I don't know what is.
I can't see for the tears of laughter!!!!!
Or is it the atlantic lapping around my ears?
Superb work My Smyth!
-
Happy to declare that I barked up the wrong tree on this one.
One day I will learn to follow my head and not my heart!
Anyone else for humble pie?
-
Piers was not talking about windchill But in any case, still a week to go ......
Certainly the newspaper didn't mention windchill but still the get-out clause hangs there if the mercury doesn't plummet to -14oC.
Perhaps a strap line of "-14oC windchill to freeze Britain" isn't sensational enough! Drop the chill and the story is more exciting. Most of the people who buy newspapers do not differentiate between -14oC windchill and -14oC temperature. They both sound cold.
Unless of course Piers Corbyn has released a transcript of what he said. Perhaps the newspapers mis-quote people sometimes?
-
Well looks like Piers Corbyn's sensationalist forecasts at the begining of this month of severe cold and -14C at the end of this month can be flushed down the preverbial toilet of tabloid stories, unless there's a drastic turnaround in fortune for next week in the models:
Err... When you read what the BBC Monthly forecast says for the next 4 weeks I am not sure I agree with you.
"But elsewhere the weather will stay windy and wet with heavy rain at times and perhaps a significant snowfall over the northern hills.
For Friday the windy theme continues. In fact, severe gales could well return, and storm force winds could arrive over the weekend. There will still be plenty of heavy showers - some of them wintry.
Across the week, temperatures will be around average, but it will feel cold in the wind - especially in the mornings across northern Britain where overnight frost and icy roads are more likely."
A wind chill of -14oC may occur and I assume that this is what My Corbyn predicted as opposed to a thermometer reading of -14oC. The snowfall is looking likely as well.
Not bad considering that a few weeks ago the BBC were forecasting a MILD end to the month.
-
oh lord, another ignorant newspaper.
People still buy news papers ? Lol, why ? We've the net, infinately superior.
---
ohh, and this has to be noted...
Wow, predictions for 'cold' in winter. How many millions are those paper pushers being paid these days? Even civil service pay does not merit this kinda nonsense talk.
---
Calrissian: predicts warmth in summer.
Sorry but I can't stop myself...
"infinately" should be infinitely
"kinda" should be kind of
At least newspapers are grammatically superior to the internet (in general!)
Nothing personal Carlissian. Bad spelling is the bane of my life.
-
I'd be interested to know what altitude you were at, to find six inches of snow.
T.M
Happy to disclose that TM.
580m. Grid ref 860838, the viewpoint on Oughtershaw Side.
-
I just wanted to resurrect this as the time frame is now much shorter. Do you all still stand by your comments? They are still on here to read.
I was in Hawes (North Yorkshire) this weekend and found myself in 6 inches (six inches!!!) of snow on Saturday. The cold was incredible and very, very welcome! Temps of about -1oC but with the windchill must have been nearer to -10oC. My Corbyn knows a little more than some give him credit for!
I am in no way linked to My Corbyn or his assosciated company/ies.
-
Reason number 11: Preference for hot weather so inaction will cause it
Reason number 12: Preference for cold weather so inaction will cause it!
Reason number 13: It will be alright in the end (perhaps the same as fatalism?)
Hard taskmaster? Turn that light off otherwise I will ask for 5 more reasons!
-
What about fatalism? The "if it's gonna happen, it's gonna happen and there ain't nothin' I can do about it" attitude.
I'm enjoying this thread, snowsure..... thanks for starting it. Perhaps we could have one afterwards with suggestions about what the next thing is that will sweep the Earth and wipe most of us out. :blink:
Reason number 1: It is not imminent
Reason number 2: We cannot trust the weather man
Reason number 3: Snow events still occcur even though GW predicts an end of the cyosphere.
Reason number 4: It is the next in the long list of unfilifilled doom and gloom predictions.
Reason Number 5: Ignorance
Reason Number 6: Avoidance
Reason number 7: Selfishness
Reason number 8: No financial incentive / high initial start-up costs
Reason number 9: Following the crowd so as not to appear different / inertia of society.
Reason number 10: Fatalism!
Thanks for the few kind words from those who appreciate this thread.
5 more reasons would be good!
-
Hi,
for me the reasons I haven't ditched the car and moved into a log cabin at the end of the garden come down to two:
1) is that it isn't really possible given the current setup of society. My company won't let me work from home. My government won't give me any tax breaks for having an environmentally friendly home. Comuting by train is almost impossible given the journey. To afford childcare/a house/reasonable standard of living etc. I need to keep my current job... you get caught in a bit of a trap.
2) being an 'early adopter' of 'strong' green behaviour puts you at a severe disadvantage (cost/time etc. as above) so why be one of the ones to do it first? especially given the feeling that the problem is so large 'what can one persons contribution do?' let the really keen people blaze the trail and join in when it is not so painful..
oh, and laziness
trevw
Reason number 8: No financial incentive / high initial start-up costs
Reason number 9: Following the crowd so as not to appear different / inertia of society.
Going well so far. Any chance we can get 15 distinct reasons? Only need 6 more...
-
Howzabout innate selfishness? My observations of people generally, over the past half century, indicate that a very large proportion of people are only concerned with themselves and the "here and now". I'm not saying that these people are doing this "positively" or "deliberately", more that it doesn't occur to them to be any other way.
Also, there are the "ignorant" people..........those who genuinely aren't aware of any effects that their behaviour may or may not have on the world around them.
Then there are the smaller groups, such as the cynics ("it's all a plot by the governments and media"), the ostriches and the "positively" selfish.
Don't forget SARS and bird flu!
Reason number 1: It is not imminent
Reason number 2: We cannot trust the weather man
Reason number 3: Snow events still occcur even though GW predicts an end of the cyosphere.
Reason number 4: It is the next in the long list of unfilifilled doom and gloom predictions.
Reason Number 5: Ignorance
Reason Number 6: Avoidance
Reason number 7: Selfishness
Good old SARS and bird flu. How could I ever forget them?
-
Let's tackle these sensibly then, although I don't know why.
1. It is imminent !. How can you be on a weather board but fail to notice the month by month record CET's or record high global temps. Climate scientists are saying that we are driving down a hill without proper brakes hence we won't stop so of course it will be worse in 10 20 30 years time.
2 Weather models of today are not the data inputs used by GCM's, GFS etc are for synoptic forecasting not global trend analysis. hence you don't use GFS to predict ENSO events in 6 months time.
3 not even worth answering, ice fields on the equator ? but you refuse to believe AGW um............
Thanks for tackling them Iceberg but that was not the purpose of the thread.
The thread is to compile a reason why you are not turning off your computer, selling your car and totally changing your lifestyle (Stop breathing so as to stop the CO2 going into the environment!)
Your comments regarding spiders concerns me. I assume flippancy on your part. As for your comments at the end regarding "... but you refuse to believe in AGW" is way off the mark.
Check my post and you will see that I have not disputed the presence of AGW and never will. Many people will question the impact of AGW against natural cycles but I do not question AGW.
Your comments suggests to me that you have mis-read my post. Thank you for your maturity regarding your posts. Your humour is appreciated.
All the Mayans predicted (actually, predict isn;t really the right word ) is that their calendar cycle would come to an end in 2012 and the next onw begin.It's on a par with me predicting that the current millennium will end on 31st December 3,000 ......
But that's all O/T. IMO public apathy about climate change is partly because any changes will be gradual. The sea level may rise 3ft in 100 years - but on a year to year basis we see little difference, so there seems little to be concerned about. Also, we're deluged with doom and gloom end of the world predictions these days - everything from supervolcanos to gamma ray bursts to terrorist nuclear attacks to Antarctica being the only place habitable by 2,100 ....... It's catastrophe overkill. It's easier to not worry about any than to worry about all of them....
Of course, there's also the fact that past predictions - not just with climate change but things like the millions of us now dying of nvCJD - have not transpired. So naturally we doubt any new predictions being made, even if they are more realistic and more informed than past ones were.
The big question though is why we continue to waste so much money on energy consumption and then moan about the cost of our energy bills? That's really does require some explaining ........
Good post Essan.
Reason number 4:
It is the next in the long list of "this will kill you." The vaccuum left by the removal of the "Red Threat" was filled with Acid rain which was filled with AIDS, then BSE. What will it be next?
Your penultimate paragraph puts it very, very nicely.
Any more reasons, ladies and gentlemen?
-
Hi Snowsure,
The Mayan calender I am informed says that 2008 and 2012 are significant times of great upheaval.
If you don't mind me asking is there anywhere on the net where i could read Mayan Calendar or at least read about it?
I call Mother Nature Lady Luck or God b/w, and IMO she will decide, what will happen regarding GW. No computer weather model program will ever come close :lol:
I think you could put me down as a reason 3er :lol:
Regards,
Russ.
Thanks Russ.
Not sure how you reason could be worded. GW still happens if it is due to Mother Nature, Lady Luck or God. Are you suggesting that GW will not happen? If so, why not. Your post appears to say that it will happen.
Try this web site for a starter on the Mayan calendar: http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/JenkinsJM2-p1.htm
SS
-
Greetings again my snow loving friends!
I wonder why we are not yet panicking about the collapse of civilisation as we know it?
We are faced with flooding of biblical proportions and GMST hot enough to melt lead (well, you know what I mean!) but still we do not act.
With your help, I intend to compile a list. So, why are we not fearing the apocalyptic predictions?
Reason number 1:
It is not imminent. All the bad things will be happening in 10, 20, or 30 years time. Well to be honest I drink too much of an evening knowing full well I will have a headache 8 hours later. I have no intention of curtailing my habits as I know that I can deal with the consequences. Perhaps in 30 years time my liver may have something to say about this but, well, in 30 years time I am going to drown/burn to death so what's the point!
Reason number 2:
We cannot trust the weather man. Short range forecasts are not 100% accurate. If the weather models of today are the data inputs of the climate models of the future then the error accumulation could be massive. Show me a model that predicted, 5 years ago, that the climate of the UK would be exactly as it is today and I will re-consider my position.
Reason number 3:
The internet shows that snow events are still occuring and, let's be honest, GW predictions mean an end of the cyosphere. As long as it snows somewhere on this troubled planet of ours, many people will say that we are only going through a re-jig of the climate bands and not suffering a loss of romantic, Dickensian snow-scapes. The Maya predicted many, many years ago that the north and south ice fields would shift to the equator so perhaps we are experiencing this event.
If you can think of any other distinct reasons why people are suspicious of GW, please post them here and I will keep a count of them.
-
I would dispute that sunflowers and maize are common crops across Southern England, although they would be preferable to the ubiquitous rape ..... I've not noticed any increase in maize (which has been grown in England for a long while anyway) and I've never seen a field of sunflowers.
But as it's not yet 2030 it hardly matters
In Yorkshire we have Maize mazes as well as several fields of sunflowers. GW is warming up event the frozen wastes of Yorkshire!
-
That's why I haven't posted but eventually you get to bursting point & have to say something :lol:
I just need proof. I've noted that the emphasis now seems to be to prove that warming is largely natural & not man-made rather than the other way around & I don't understand why.
It's the same sort of dumb question I ask about the ozone hole over the Antarctic. We didn't know it was there until we discovered it! The question I've always asked is, has it always been there to a greater or lesser extent? It seems a perfectly reasonable question, but when I've asked (not on NW I hasten to add) I get looked at as though I must be missing something :lol:
Dave
It would be sooooo human of us to discover what we think is a "problem", spend millions on trying to fix it and then find out it was meant to be that way in the first place. Then, at the same time, we spend just as much time and money making problems that nature then tries to fix for us!
How we evolved into the highly intelligent state that we are now I have got no idea.
P.S. What contribution has bonfire night and fireworks made to our current plight in terms of increasing the amount of CO2? It certainly will not have reduced the level of gasses in the atmosphere. Add on all the summer time barbeques as well.
Hmmm. Let's not stop the industrial advances of others when we haven't curtailed our own activities.
-
If Hiya's questions had been raised to me, my answers would have been pretty much the same.
I think the differentiation between "sceptic" and "denier" is an important one. I would've thought that a denier is someone who denies the existence of something (especially, as in the case of AGW, if that something is likely to be true, with negative implications). A sceptic, on the other hand, is normally someone who questions a belief or system of beliefs; I tend to see scepticism as a positive thing provided constructive reasoning is given, but denial as potentially a negative thing.
Some good points above by P3 also, going into greater depth.
Interesting liguistic undercurrent developing.
Sceptic - a doubter
Denier - a unit of weight, especially of silk or nylon
Deny - Declare un-true or non-existent.
As a guide, the older you get, the more you doubt. Also your cynical quotient goes up!
A younger person will be more inclined to deny things whilst a grumpy old person is more inclined to doubt the existence of something (love, happiness, joy, fair play, etc.) that they once fervently believed in when they were younger.
-
Even if it does become true, they will only be credited to having made a lucky guess. So they are on a hiding to nothing coming out with an headline like this. Like many have said, it's hardly a revelation to say that parts of the country will be at -10. Almost every winter, somewhere get's that temperature. I treat LRF's, especially one's saturated in headline seeking sensationalim, with a large pinch of ice melting salt.
Dodgerdee claims parts of the United Kingdom to freeze in autumn!!!
The press can easily sensationalise a story without the contributor seeking sensationalism.
The strap line is made up of Dodgerdee's comments and from terminology taken from the metoffice (i.e. November is an autumn month, not a winter month.)
Nothing personal against Dodgerdee. I am demonstrating the press' ablity to sensationalise a non-sensational story.
Only an ignoramus would disagree with his sentiments about LRF's.
I also understand that suicides increase in an area when a fohn sets up! :lol: 
But in any case, still a week to go ......
Global Warming
in Space, Science & nature
Posted
The Duke article appears to question the extent of mans influence "This study does not discount that human-linked greenhouse gases contribute to global warming, they stressed. "Those gases would still give a contribution, but not so strong as was thought," Scafetta said."
If humans are only contributing 70% to the problem then the models have to change. I reckon that the action that we have to take should still the same.
The Duke report also states ""The problem is that Earth's atmosphere is not in thermodynamic equilibrium with the sun," Scafetta said. "The longer the time period the stronger the effect will be on the atmosphere, because it takes time to adapt.""
This perhaps deals with your second point, SF. The time taken for this solar minima to cause terrestrial reaction may make 2007 a less hot year.
Just a thought!
We should put thermometers on the Moon and observe the temperature changes there. It would make a more fair test!