Green House Gases Rising Like "a Speeding Freight Train"

[Crick]

And here are the May and June graphs from Rutger's Snow Lab

Both show severe declines. The NH snow extent for November 2018 was the highest since 1966 but that is not what you are claiming. The rest of the year show small increases or no change. The sum, for the year, per the NSIDC, is a decline.

SOTC: Northern Hemisphere Snow | National Snow and Ice Data Center
Northern Hemisphere Snow
We all associate snowstorms with cold weather, but snow's influence on the weather and climate continues long after the storm ends. Because snow is highly reflective, a vast amount of sunlight that hits the snow is reflected back into space instead of warming the planet. Without snow cover, the ground absorbs about four to six times more of the Sun's energy. The presence or absence of snow controls patterns of heating and cooling over Earth's land surface more than any other single land surface feature.

In many locations in recent decades, temperatures have risen while precipitation levels have remained largely the same. Satellite data have confirmed that average snow cover has decreased, especially in the spring and summer. Where snow cover is disappearing earlier in the spring, the large amounts of energy that would have melted the snow can now directly warm the soil.

In terms of spatial extent, seasonal snow cover is the largest single component of the cryosphere and has a mean winter maximum areal extent of 47 million square kilometers, about 98 percent of which is located in the Northern Hemisphere.

 

[flacaltenn]

And here are the May and June graphs from Rutger's Snow Lab

View attachment 233507
View attachment 233508

Both show severe declines. The NH snow extent for November 2018 was the highest since 1966 but that is not what you are claiming. The rest of the year show small increases or no change. The sum, for the year, per the NSIDC, is a decline.

SOTC: Northern Hemisphere Snow | National Snow and Ice Data Center
Northern Hemisphere Snow
We all associate snowstorms with cold weather, but snow's influence on the weather and climate continues long after the storm ends. Because snow is highly reflective, a vast amount of sunlight that hits the snow is reflected back into space instead of warming the planet. Without snow cover, the ground absorbs about four to six times more of the Sun's energy. The presence or absence of snow controls patterns of heating and cooling over Earth's land surface more than any other single land surface feature.

In many locations in recent decades, temperatures have risen while precipitation levels have remained largely the same. Satellite data have confirmed that average snow cover has decreased, especially in the spring and summer. Where snow cover is disappearing earlier in the spring, the large amounts of energy that would have melted the snow can now directly warm the soil.

In terms of spatial extent, seasonal snow cover is the largest single component of the cryosphere and has a mean winter maximum areal extent of 47 million square kilometers, about 98 percent of which is located in the Northern Hemisphere.

MAY AND JUNE??? Seriously? You're dealing with a parameter that has HUGE variance. If you look at the GOOD years back in 70s on your graph -- the AVG for the ENTIRE NH in May/June was maybe 2 Million Km.. That's fucking TINY.. And is influenced by a LOT more than temperature. Slightly increased spring PRECIPT or one warm day could easily melt MOST of that..

The avg WINTER coverage (from your link) is 47 Million Km.. You're talking almost NON-EXISTENT coverage in the GOOD years. And my bet is, like the screwy Sea Ice coverage definition of "greater than 15%" --- this number isn't describing ABUNDANT HEAVY snow fields. But little patches of snow in the middle of mostly bare ground.

 

[Crick]

Jesus I wish you people would actually read the article at the link. It wasn't long. May and June were presented because they show the largest decline. The average for the year is also negative.

 

[flacaltenn]

Jesus I wish you people would actually read the article at the link. It wasn't long. May and June were presented because they show the largest decline. The average for the year is also negative.

No Crick. I honestly get it. And poor little you ADMITTED that you searched for the LARGEST DECLINE. What I'm telling you is that this TINY RESIDUAL in May and June is NOT a thermometer. It's an artifact at the end of a winter season. And 2Mill Km residual from 47 Mill Km avg winter is not really telling much about anything.

Doesn't say that the 1970s springs/summers were COOLER than normal -- Or that the springs/summers now are WARMER than normal.. It's too ethereal to be valuable..

 

[Sunsettommy]

And here are the May and June graphs from Rutger's Snow Lab

View attachment 233507
View attachment 233508

Both show severe declines. The NH snow extent for November 2018 was the highest since 1966 but that is not what you are claiming. The rest of the year show small increases or no change. The sum, for the year, per the NSIDC, is a decline.

SOTC: Northern Hemisphere Snow | National Snow and Ice Data Center
Northern Hemisphere Snow
We all associate snowstorms with cold weather, but snow's influence on the weather and climate continues long after the storm ends. Because snow is highly reflective, a vast amount of sunlight that hits the snow is reflected back into space instead of warming the planet. Without snow cover, the ground absorbs about four to six times more of the Sun's energy. The presence or absence of snow controls patterns of heating and cooling over Earth's land surface more than any other single land surface feature.

In many locations in recent decades, temperatures have risen while precipitation levels have remained largely the same. Satellite data have confirmed that average snow cover has decreased, especially in the spring and summer. Where snow cover is disappearing earlier in the spring, the large amounts of energy that would have melted the snow can now directly warm the soil.

In terms of spatial extent, seasonal snow cover is the largest single component of the cryosphere and has a mean winter maximum areal extent of 47 million square kilometers, about 98 percent of which is located in the Northern Hemisphere.

Unbelievable!

Here is what I said to you that you ducked:

"The IPCC projected DECREASING Snow, yet we get the opposite as shown here, while they projected in its place increasing rain and freezing rain.

EPIC FAIL!

Do you know why snow cover dropped from May to August since 1980?

Here is the LINK to see the monthly snow cover anomaly.

Stop being dishonest and misleading!"

Flacaltenn pointed out this OBVIOUS point that you still don't get:

"MAY AND JUNE??? Seriously? You're dealing with a parameter that has HUGE variance. If you look at the GOOD years back in 70s on your graph -- the AVG for the ENTIRE NH in May/June was maybe 2 Million Km.. That's fucking TINY.. And is influenced by a LOT more than temperature. Slightly increased spring PRECIPT or one warm day could easily melt MOST of that.."

This is WHY I asked you this question in my previous post:

"Do you know why snow cover dropped from May to August since 1980?"

You presented the perfect example of a half thinker, ignoring WHY is was so different in the late 60's to 1980, ignoring what the IPCC said and ignoring the fact that Fall and Winter Snow extent INCREASES are far larger than the those small decreases in the summer.

You don't present what it was decades BEFORE 1968 at all, thus you present a very small snow baseline to hang your dishonest narrative of a shrinking snow total, when in reality the INCREASE in the Fall and Winter time easily makes up for the small decrease of snowfall in the summer time.

Look at the FALL time in Northern Hemisphere, it is a large increase over last 25 years:

It has reached at least 20 MILLION sq. km for the last 6 years.

A smaller increase for WINTER:

It has reached at least 45 MILLION sq. km in every year except the years 2000 and 2006.

LINK

 

[Crick]

Do you understand that you just committed the same cherry picking that you jumped on me about?

Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Variability and Change, 1915–97

Abstract
Historical and reconstructed snow cover data from stations in Canada, the United States, the former Soviet Union, and the People’s Republic of China were used to reconstruct monthly snow cover extent (SCE) fluctuations over midlatitudinal (∼40°–60°N) regions of North America (NA) and Eurasia back to the early 1900s using an areal snow index approach. The station distribution over NA allowed SCE to be reconstructed back to 1915 for 6 months (November–April), along with estimates of monthly mean snow water equivalent (SWE) from gridded daily snow depth data. Over Eurasia, SCE was able to be reconstructed back to 1922, but major gaps in the station network limited the approach to 3 months (October, March, and April). The reconstruction provided evidence of a general twentieth century increase in NA SCE, with significant increases in winter (December–February) SWE averaging 3.9% per decade. The results are consistent with an observed increasing trend in winter snow depth over Russia and provide further evidence for systematic increases in precipitation over NH midlatitudes. North American spring snow cover was characterized by rapid decreases during the 1980s and early 1990s with a significant long-term decrease in April SWE averaging 4.4% per decade. Eurasia was characterized by a significant reduction in April SCE over the 1922–97 period associated with a significant spring warming. The snow cover reduction was significant at the hemispheric scale with an estimated average NH SCE loss of 3.1 × 106 km2 (100 yr)−1 associated with significant warming of 1.26°C (100 yr)−1 over NH midlatitudinal land areas (40°–60°N). The computed temperature sensitivity of NH April SCE was −2.04 × 106 km2 °C−1. Since 1950, March SCE decreases have become more important than those in April with significant reductions over both continents averaging 8.5 × 106 km2(100 yr)−1. March was also observed to have experienced the largest warming during the November–April snow season with significant post-1950 warming trends in both continents averaging 4.1°C (100 yr)−1. The hemisphere-wide elevated March snow cover–temperature response is consistent with the position of the snowline over continental grassland vegetation zones where snow cover is relatively shallow and the potential snow cover area–albedo feedback is large.

Corresponding author address: Ross D. Brown, Meteorological Service of Canada, 2121 Trans Canada Highway, Dorval QC H9P 1J3.

Email: [email protected]

 

[flacaltenn]

You don't present what it was decades BEFORE 1968 at all, thus you present a very small snow baseline to hang your dishonest narrative of a shrinking snow total, when in reality the INCREASE in the Fall and Winter time easily makes up for the small decrease of snowfall in the summer time.

And there's the key to ending this argument. If there is significant Oct-May data back to 1900 -- where is IT?

I don't do snow or ice as thermometer proxies -- so I'm not interested at all in fetching this.. Snow VOLUME is NOT related to temperature alone. And snow VOLUME is what determines how long the residuals last into Spring and Summer..

 

[Sunsettommy]

Do you understand that you just committed the same cherry picking that you jumped on me about?

Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Variability and Change, 1915–97

Abstract
Historical and reconstructed snow cover data from stations in Canada, the United States, the former Soviet Union, and the People’s Republic of China were used to reconstruct monthly snow cover extent (SCE) fluctuations over midlatitudinal (∼40°–60°N) regions of North America (NA) and Eurasia back to the early 1900s using an areal snow index approach. The station distribution over NA allowed SCE to be reconstructed back to 1915 for 6 months (November–April), along with estimates of monthly mean snow water equivalent (SWE) from gridded daily snow depth data. Over Eurasia, SCE was able to be reconstructed back to 1922, but major gaps in the station network limited the approach to 3 months (October, March, and April). The reconstruction provided evidence of a general twentieth century increase in NA SCE, with significant increases in winter (December–February) SWE averaging 3.9% per decade. The results are consistent with an observed increasing trend in winter snow depth over Russia and provide further evidence for systematic increases in precipitation over NH midlatitudes. North American spring snow cover was characterized by rapid decreases during the 1980s and early 1990s with a significant long-term decrease in April SWE averaging 4.4% per decade. Eurasia was characterized by a significant reduction in April SCE over the 1922–97 period associated with a significant spring warming. The snow cover reduction was significant at the hemispheric scale with an estimated average NH SCE loss of 3.1 × 106 km2 (100 yr)−1 associated with significant warming of 1.26°C (100 yr)−1 over NH midlatitudinal land areas (40°–60°N). The computed temperature sensitivity of NH April SCE was −2.04 × 106 km2 °C−1. Since 1950, March SCE decreases have become more important than those in April with significant reductions over both continents averaging 8.5 × 106 km2(100 yr)−1. March was also observed to have experienced the largest warming during the November–April snow season with significant post-1950 warming trends in both continents averaging 4.1°C (100 yr)−1. The hemisphere-wide elevated March snow cover–temperature response is consistent with the position of the snowline over continental grassland vegetation zones where snow cover is relatively shallow and the potential snow cover area–albedo feedback is large.

Corresponding author address: Ross D. Brown, Meteorological Service of Canada, 2121 Trans Canada Highway, Dorval QC H9P 1J3.

Email: [email protected]

Ha ha ha, you still keep dodging my question about the undenied decline of Summer ice, now you bring in the undenied decline in Spring ice too which my QUESTION is highly relevant on.

Here is the question you avoided:

Do you know why snow cover dropped from May to August since 1980?

Then you post an UNSOURCED published paper: Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover Variability and Change, 1915–97

Notice that the scientist starts his run right at the BEGINNING of the warming trend that lasted into the early 1940's. Thus can generate a misleading snow decline claim, the newspapers in 1922 to 1939 were talking about large ice loss in the Arctic BECAUSE the warming

LINK

He also said from the Abstract this misleading presentation:

"The station distribution over NA allowed SCE to be reconstructed back to 1915 for 6 months (November–April), along with estimates of monthly mean snow water equivalent (SWE) from gridded daily snow depth data. Over Eurasia, SCE was able to be reconstructed back to 1922, but major gaps in the station network limited the approach to 3 months (October, March, and April)."

Notice the gaps in the early days from nations NOT famous for significant snow and temperature data, USSR and China, nations with very little snow and temperature data outside of a their few large cities.

Snicker...………..

 

[jc456]

Personally, I do not know why you Repubs are getting so irate with this thread, you all think greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is a good thing and protecting the environment is a joke, well you're getting your wishes. Celebrate the filth you so desperately want.

first you have to prove there is a greenhouse gas and how it works. There is no observed or measured data for you to reference. Feel free to post it right here and prove me wrong.

 

[jc456]

Personally, I do not know why you Repubs are getting so irate with this thread, you all think greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is a good thing and protecting the environment is a joke, well you're getting your wishes. Celebrate the filth you so desperately want.

do you know the temperature of 20 PPM of CO2? does anyone? please again, post it here proudly!!!

 

[jc456]

I can't wait for the milder winters I have been promised for 20 years now

dude, almost four years now.

 

[jc456]

Personally, I do not know why you Repubs are getting so irate with this thread, you all think greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is a good thing and protecting the environment is a joke, well you're getting your wishes. Celebrate the filth you so desperately want.

The primary reason is disgust over the state of the educational system which is spitting out people like you one after another. People with no critical thinking skills whatsoever...people who think science like climate science is out of the reach of people who don't have a degree that says climate science on it...people who aren't even aware that climate science is a soft science...as opposed to the hard sciences like physics, chemistry, meteorology. Climate science is to hard science as chiropractic is to the practice of medicine. People like you who don't possess an informed opinion of their own, but are happy to propagate the opinion given to you by someone with a political agenda.

Sadly these kinds of people have become much too common.

They will do well in our Orwellian future.

non of them to date can even admit they haven't seen one iota of evidence of what they spew daily in here. observed measured data to support the statements. They brush that fact off like dandruff on their shoulder. I honestly don't understand how a thinking person can do that. Therefore, I'm left with the impression they aren't thinking people.

 

[jc456]

How do "climate scientists" measure Man's effect on climate when it has changed drastically all by itself before Man, and Man's Industrialization? Also, it continues to change that's why the Left changed the name from Man Made Global Warming to "Climate Change". So any warming, or cooling is now solely Man's fault when even NASA tells us we are experiencing, and going to experience cooling due to the Sun, and other natural occurrences.

There has never been a peer reviewed, published paper in which the hypothetical warming caused by our activities has been empirically measured, quantified, and attributed to so called greenhouse gasses. Not a single peer reviewed published paper. And they are all so sure...it is a clear indication that you are dealing with people of faith, not people of science.

Yeah sure, everyone is wrong except you and a few others on this board. I'll take the word and science of the 10,000 plus scientists and climate specialist over a group of conspiracy-oriented ideological-biased amateur scientists.

why don't you ask your scientists to post the observed measured data then? why don't you take that step and ask? Or, are you saying you've seen it? if so, please share with the class.

 

[skookerasbil]

ALL ABOARD!!!

 

[jc456]

ALL ABOARD!!!

 

[Crick]

 

[Marion Morrison]

The world’s greenhouse gas emissions are rising at a faster pace in 2018 than they did last year, researchers said Wednesday, the latest evidence that planet-warming pollution is proliferating again after a three-year lull in the middle of the decade. That trend is accelerating the earth’s collision course with some of the most severe consequences of climate change, scientists warned......

In an accompanying commentary in the journal Nature, scientists said the increases put the world on track with the highest emissions trajectory modeled by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations scientific group. That group issued an alarming report in October that warned that, if emissions continued to rise at the current rate, the planet would warm 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above preindustrial levels by 2040, opening the door to widespread food shortages, wildfires, coastal flooding and population displacement.

But the recent rise in global emissions, together with other factors, including natural variability, could accelerate the timeline, thrusting the earth above that threshold of warming by 2030, the scientists said. They compared the emissions increases to a “speeding freight train.”......

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rise Like a ‘Speeding Freight Train’ in 2018

***********************************************************************

I have always voted only for those that supported action in combating global warming. I realized that it was always an uphill battle as the forces of greed and short-sightedness are very powerful foes. The war to halt our fall into the environmental abyss is very close to being lost. I realize that there are millions of people who could give two shits for the environment or the world that they leave their children, some of whom are on this board.

Given that greenhouse emissions are rising, the Amazon basin is about to be raped, and that there is little hope in the near future to stop the degradation of our environment, the Denialist movement is on the ascendancy.

Congratulations. You have money in your pocket today. Tomorrow your children (and mine) will be suffering and dealing with the clusterfck you left them.

GreenHead Gasbags

Mercenary climate "scientists" are making more money off scare stories than even Stephen King does.

Actually, it's the MEDIA that runs a free worldwide marketing blitz for this agenda. There are actually very few of the "elite" climate scientists that are grabbing headlines with outlandish predictions and unfounded "conclusions" anymore.

Circus is packing up the tents. REAL enviro problems coming BACK on the table. Thank Gawd !!!

Off-topic, but getting rid of plastic island would be good!

 

[Crick]

My that NYTimes article was hysterical and inaccurate by omission. There's NO "speeding freight train". The data speaks for itself. And this below is a lie by omission...

The United States, one of the wealthiest nations in the world, is responsible for a third of all human-caused carbon emissions to date, more than any other country.

The US has decreased CO2 emissions recently back to MID 90s levels. NOT IN NYTimes article. Also not in article --- this was done by PRIVATE VENTURE to become the worlds producer of Nat Gas -- a cleaner alternative to coal. All this was accomplished IN SPITE of all roadside bombs that Obama put on Nat Gas development and new pipelines.

We have accomplished MORE OUTSIDE of the Paris accord than most nations that are IN IT. Our free markets figured it out, did the ROInvestment calculations and ignored the barriers the govt set in it;s path.

It had nothing to do with a free market. It happened because American businesses KNOW that AGW is real and a real threat, needs to be dealt with and they possess the wherewithal to do so. That is, they know that Trump is an irresponsible IDIOT.

 

[jc456]

My that NYTimes article was hysterical and inaccurate by omission. There's NO "speeding freight train". The data speaks for itself. And this below is a lie by omission...

The United States, one of the wealthiest nations in the world, is responsible for a third of all human-caused carbon emissions to date, more than any other country.

The US has decreased CO2 emissions recently back to MID 90s levels. NOT IN NYTimes article. Also not in article --- this was done by PRIVATE VENTURE to become the worlds producer of Nat Gas -- a cleaner alternative to coal. All this was accomplished IN SPITE of all roadside bombs that Obama put on Nat Gas development and new pipelines.

We have accomplished MORE OUTSIDE of the Paris accord than most nations that are IN IT. Our free markets figured it out, did the ROInvestment calculations and ignored the barriers the govt set in it;s path.

It had nothing to do with a free market. It happened because American businesses KNOW that AGW is real and a real threat, needs to be dealt with and they possess the wherewithal to do so. That is, they know that Trump is an irresponsible IDIOT.

they know it's real? really? well post up that observed measured data that proved it's real. Come on sherlock, get that investigative blood going.

 

[flacaltenn]

My that NYTimes article was hysterical and inaccurate by omission. There's NO "speeding freight train". The data speaks for itself. And this below is a lie by omission...

The United States, one of the wealthiest nations in the world, is responsible for a third of all human-caused carbon emissions to date, more than any other country.

The US has decreased CO2 emissions recently back to MID 90s levels. NOT IN NYTimes article. Also not in article --- this was done by PRIVATE VENTURE to become the worlds producer of Nat Gas -- a cleaner alternative to coal. All this was accomplished IN SPITE of all roadside bombs that Obama put on Nat Gas development and new pipelines.

We have accomplished MORE OUTSIDE of the Paris accord than most nations that are IN IT. Our free markets figured it out, did the ROInvestment calculations and ignored the barriers the govt set in it;s path.

It had nothing to do with a free market. It happened because American businesses KNOW that AGW is real and a real threat, needs to be dealt with and they possess the wherewithal to do so. That is, they know that Trump is an irresponsible IDIOT.

That deserved more than a funny..,..

Youre completely lost if you miss the major jump in fracking for natural gas and oil that has turned this country into a net energy EXPORTER.. It was the fracked nat gas boom that accounted for the monumental reductions in CO2 emissions. And it was done IN SPITE OF the total resistance and road blocks tossed up by the Obama Admin on fracking and pipelines.

If you think the energy companies did this because they support your "dead-ender" view of CO2 emissions, you're deluded.

Yes, we were able to close SOME coal plants. But NOT BECAUSE of any "green shoots" Obama fantasies. It was because we suddenly had an ABUNDANCE of cleaner burning nat gas to exploit and use..