More AGW Evidence: Record Dec Snowfall in Central Park

[Old Rocks]

More snow = greater precipitation = increased water vapor = more evaporation = more heat.

Oh, that's right, according to right wingers on this site, "evaporation" is a "wild theory". Sorry, I forgot.

Problem with that little equation is that more heat would mean more RAIN, not snow.

Dumbass.

Damn. You fellows just keep posting stupidity. In the winter at high latitudes, more heat means that the air containing the heat and moisture gets cooled and falls as snow.Have you ever heard of the lake effect;

Lake-effect snow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of the Nature series on
Weather

Weather Portal
v • d • e

Lake-effect snow is produced in cooler atmospheric conditions when cold winds move across long expanses of warmer lake water, providing energy and picking up water vapor which freezes and is deposited on the leeward shores. The same effect over bodies of salt water is called ocean effect snow, sea effect snow, or even bay effect snow. The effect is enhanced when the moving air mass is uplifted by the orographic effect of higher elevations on the downwind shores. This uplifting can produce narrow but very intense bands of precipitation, which deposit at a rate of many inches of snow each hour, often resulting in copious snowfall totals. The areas affected by lake-effect snow are called snowbelts. This effect occurs in many locations throughout the world but is best known in the populated areas of the Great Lakes of North America, and especially Western New York, northwestern Pennsylvania, northeastern Ohio, southwestern and central Ontario, northwestern and northcentral Indiana (mostly between Gary, IN and Elkhart, IN), western Michigan and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, which can average over 200 inches (5 meters) of snow per year and averages the most snow of any non-mountainous location within the continental U.S.[1]

 

[Old Rocks]

Manmade global warming theory is no more than a horoscope reading

I can read my wifes horoscope and say, "hey that is like, so what I been, like, thinking lately."

The theory is failing apart right before our eyes

Your proof of which is? Come on, boy, surely you can defend your point of view. How about showing us a National Academy of Science statement that says that? Or how about a statement from the American Geophysical Union, which has more climate scientists in it than any other organization in the world.

Scientific Group Releases New Statement on Climate Change | LiveScience

The world’s largest society of Earth and space scientists has released a new statement on climate change that unequivocally names human activity as the cause of global warming.

"Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming," according to the first paragraph of the statement by the American Geophysical Union. The statement cites many components of the Earth system that are changing at unnatural rates, including rising global temperatures, ice melt, sea level rise and the distribution of precipitation around the globe.

"The facts are well-established now that the Earth's climate is warming," said Bette Otto-Bliesner of National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado at a press conference today in Washington, D.C., held to release the statement.

 

[Muhammed]

Your proof of which is? Come on, boy, surely you can defend your point of view. How about showing us a National Academy of Science statement that says that? Or how about a statement from the American Geophysical Union, which has more climate scientists in it than any other organization in the world.

Scientific Group Releases New Statement on Climate Change | LiveScience

The world’s largest society of Earth and space scientists has released a new statement on climate change that unequivocally names human activity as the cause of global warming.

"Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming," according to the first paragraph of the statement by the American Geophysical Union. The statement cites many components of the Earth system that are changing at unnatural rates, including rising global temperatures, ice melt, sea level rise and the distribution of precipitation around the globe.

"The facts are well-established now that the Earth's climate is warming," said Bette Otto-Bliesner of National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado at a press conference today in Washington, D.C., held to release the statement.

Sound like a typical fallacious appeal to authority.

BTW, isn't that the same organization that gave climategate fraudster Michael Mann an award for corrupting the peer review process.

 

[Old Rocks]

In science, you present evidence. If you had ever bothered to read any science at all, you would find that there are Scientiific Societies, the oldest of which is the Royal Society of England, that make statements according to what the evidence points to. Now if you can find a Scientific Society that states that AGW is not real, please feel free to present their statement and a link to them.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Just look at who's behind the Global Warming scam and there is where you will find all the answers you need. It's the Leftist Bed-Wetters from Western Europe and the U.S. who are behind all this hysterical fear mongering. Great Britain is the worst of the worst when it comes to this hystrical fear mongering. The U.S. is a very close second. Great Britain became a nation of whiny Wussies a long time ago. It's just too bad many in the U.S. are following their lead and becoming such whiny Wussies too. It's all about scaring the people so they can force their political agenda through. Lots and lots of money to be made off this scam as well. Just say No to fear and don't join their cult.

 

[Trajan]

In science, you present evidence. If you had ever bothered to read any science at all, you would find that there are Scientiific Societies, the oldest of which is the Royal Society of England, that make statements according to what the evidence points to. Now if you can find a Scientific Society that states that AGW is not real, please feel free to present their statement and a link to them.

Apropos the whole magilla, GW now CC etc etc..

it appears that many like yourself refuse to digest a few truths that bear on the debate overall outside the direct science per se';
a) your own affiliates, orgs etc. have betrayed scientific principals by ensconcing yourselves inside your own box,
b) having done so have engaged in furtive data manipulation,
c) there fore you have denigrated your own ability to gain traction or influence debate,
d) the damage over all is HUGE, as is their venality in creating his situation, I agree IF it ever became very very important to listen few are because you have politicized the science and whats more, its delivery,
e)In short you have screwed the pooch, IF you have a valid point no one listens anymore because you have created a atmosphere of arrogant of closed mindedness and an aura of dishonesty.

 

[Oddball]

More snow = greater precipitation = increased water vapor = more evaporation = more heat.

Oh, that's right, according to right wingers on this site, "evaporation" is a "wild theory". Sorry, I forgot.

Problem with that little equation is that more heat would mean more RAIN, not snow.

Dumbass.

Damn. You fellows just keep posting stupidity. In the winter at high latitudes, more heat means that the air containing the heat and moisture gets cooled and falls as snow.Have you ever heard of the lake effect;

Lake-effect snow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of the Nature series on
Weather

Weather Portal
v • d • e

Lake-effect snow is produced in cooler atmospheric conditions when cold winds move across long expanses of warmer lake water, providing energy and picking up water vapor which freezes and is deposited on the leeward shores. The same effect over bodies of salt water is called ocean effect snow, sea effect snow, or even bay effect snow. The effect is enhanced when the moving air mass is uplifted by the orographic effect of higher elevations on the downwind shores. This uplifting can produce narrow but very intense bands of precipitation, which deposit at a rate of many inches of snow each hour, often resulting in copious snowfall totals. The areas affected by lake-effect snow are called snowbelts. This effect occurs in many locations throughout the world but is best known in the populated areas of the Great Lakes of North America, and especially Western New York, northwestern Pennsylvania, northeastern Ohio, southwestern and central Ontario, northwestern and northcentral Indiana (mostly between Gary, IN and Elkhart, IN), western Michigan and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, which can average over 200 inches (5 meters) of snow per year and averages the most snow of any non-mountainous location within the continental U.S.[1]

Lake effect or not, you need COLD AIR to get snow.

Ergo, the warmer ambient air temperatures you Chicken Little know-nothings keep wringing your hands about would naturally translate into more rain and less snow....Dipschitt.

 

[Big Fitz]

Winner of the Oregon Green Twit of the Year award, Ole Crocks needs to move to Buffalo or Michigan's Upper Peninsula and learn about lake effect snow.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

In science, you present evidence. If you had ever bothered to read any science at all, you would find that there are Scientiific Societies, the oldest of which is the Royal Society of England, that make statements according to what the evidence points to. Now if you can find a Scientific Society that states that AGW is not real, please feel free to present their statement and a link to them.

What evidence have the Warmers ever presented?

Show me one single repeatable laboratory experiment that back up your bizzaroland "200PPM increase in CO2 raises temperatures by 3-7 degrees" theory.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Problem with that little equation is that more heat would mean more RAIN, not snow.

Dumbass.

Damn. You fellows just keep posting stupidity. In the winter at high latitudes, more heat means that the air containing the heat and moisture gets cooled and falls as snow.Have you ever heard of the lake effect;

Lake-effect snow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of the Nature series on
Weather

Weather Portal
v • d • e

Lake-effect snow is produced in cooler atmospheric conditions when cold winds move across long expanses of warmer lake water, providing energy and picking up water vapor which freezes and is deposited on the leeward shores. The same effect over bodies of salt water is called ocean effect snow, sea effect snow, or even bay effect snow. The effect is enhanced when the moving air mass is uplifted by the orographic effect of higher elevations on the downwind shores. This uplifting can produce narrow but very intense bands of precipitation, which deposit at a rate of many inches of snow each hour, often resulting in copious snowfall totals. The areas affected by lake-effect snow are called snowbelts. This effect occurs in many locations throughout the world but is best known in the populated areas of the Great Lakes of North America, and especially Western New York, northwestern Pennsylvania, northeastern Ohio, southwestern and central Ontario, northwestern and northcentral Indiana (mostly between Gary, IN and Elkhart, IN), western Michigan and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, which can average over 200 inches (5 meters) of snow per year and averages the most snow of any non-mountainous location within the continental U.S.[1]

Lake effect or not, you need COLD AIR to get snow.

Ergo, the warmer ambient air temperatures you Chicken Little know-nothings keep wringing your hands about would naturally translate into more rain and less snow....Dipschitt.

And colder air comes from the Global WarmerCoolering Effect

 

[Big Fitz]

In science, you present evidence. If you had ever bothered to read any science at all, you would find that there are Scientiific Societies, the oldest of which is the Royal Society of England, that make statements according to what the evidence points to. Now if you can find a Scientific Society that states that AGW is not real, please feel free to present their statement and a link to them.

What evidence have the Warmers ever presented?

Show me one single repeatable laboratory experiment that back up your bizzaroloand "200PPM increase in CO2 raises temperatures by 3-7 degrees" theory.

Consensus isn't proof?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Narsarsuaq, Greenland

Currently 41F -

Narsarsuaq, Greenland Forecast : Weather Underground

The high Sat is forecast 59F in the dark on the first day of 2011.

 

[westwall]

Well I have to admit to some confusion here. We are talking about Greenland right?


According to the weather station AT Narsarsuaq Greenland the current temp is 10C, the forecast for saturday is 0C with light snow. Night temps will be -5C with a 50% chance of snow.

Which planet is Weather Underground predicting for?


Narsarsuaq, Greenland 7 Day Weather Forecast - WeatherBug.com

http://www.weather-forecast.com/locations/Narsarsuaq/forecasts/latest

Both of these show colder temps then weather underground. One of them has a 20 degree spread!

Narsarsuaq, Greenland

Currently 41F -

Narsarsuaq, Greenland Forecast : Weather Underground

The high Sat is forecast 59F in the dark on the first day of 2011.

 

[rdean]

Well I have to admit to some confusion here. We are talking about Greenland right?


According to the weather station AT Narsarsuaq Greenland the current temp is 10C, the forecast for saturday is 0C with light snow. Night temps will be -5C with a 50% chance of snow.

Which planet is Weather Underground predicting for?


Narsarsuaq, Greenland 7 Day Weather Forecast - WeatherBug.com

http://www.weather-forecast.com/locations/Narsarsuaq/forecasts/latest

Both of these show colder temps then weather underground. One of them has a 20 degree spread!

Narsarsuaq, Greenland

Currently 41F -

Narsarsuaq, Greenland Forecast : Weather Underground

The high Sat is forecast 59F in the dark on the first day of 2011.

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman

As opposed to the "ignorance of the ignorant". I would rather trust people who at least spent the time to learn something.

 

[skookerasbil]

Well I have to admit to some confusion here. We are talking about Greenland right?


According to the weather station AT Narsarsuaq Greenland the current temp is 10C, the forecast for saturday is 0C with light snow. Night temps will be -5C with a 50% chance of snow.

Which planet is Weather Underground predicting for?


Narsarsuaq, Greenland 7 Day Weather Forecast - WeatherBug.com

http://www.weather-forecast.com/locations/Narsarsuaq/forecasts/latest

Both of these show colder temps then weather underground. One of them has a 20 degree spread!

Narsarsuaq, Greenland

Currently 41F -

Narsarsuaq, Greenland Forecast : Weather Underground

The high Sat is forecast 59F in the dark on the first day of 2011.

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman

As opposed to the "ignorance of the ignorant". I would rather trust people who at least spent the time to learn something.

Translation??

"Im a FAITHER and forged data is data good enough for me if the scientists are saying its science."

 

[westwall]

Well I have to admit to some confusion here. We are talking about Greenland right?


According to the weather station AT Narsarsuaq Greenland the current temp is 10C, the forecast for saturday is 0C with light snow. Night temps will be -5C with a 50% chance of snow.

Which planet is Weather Underground predicting for?


Narsarsuaq, Greenland 7 Day Weather Forecast - WeatherBug.com

http://www.weather-forecast.com/locations/Narsarsuaq/forecasts/latest

Both of these show colder temps then weather underground. One of them has a 20 degree spread!

Narsarsuaq, Greenland

Currently 41F -

Narsarsuaq, Greenland Forecast : Weather Underground

The high Sat is forecast 59F in the dark on the first day of 2011.

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman

As opposed to the "ignorance of the ignorant". I would rather trust people who at least spent the time to learn something.

Yes, you'll notice I have that quote in my signature. I actually knew him and had dinner with him on several occasions. I learned a great deal from him. I suggest you just go learn.

 

[rdean]

Well I have to admit to some confusion here. We are talking about Greenland right?


According to the weather station AT Narsarsuaq Greenland the current temp is 10C, the forecast for saturday is 0C with light snow. Night temps will be -5C with a 50% chance of snow.

Which planet is Weather Underground predicting for?


Narsarsuaq, Greenland 7 Day Weather Forecast - WeatherBug.com

http://www.weather-forecast.com/locations/Narsarsuaq/forecasts/latest

Both of these show colder temps then weather underground. One of them has a 20 degree spread!

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman

As opposed to the "ignorance of the ignorant". I would rather trust people who at least spent the time to learn something.

Yes, you'll notice I have that quote in my signature. I actually knew him and had dinner with him on several occasions. I learned a great deal from him. I suggest you just go learn.

If you can't learn from scientists, you can't learn at all. Trust me on this.

This might be a little deep for you. You don't learn from "ignorance", because it's something that is "spread around" and not "learned. Science, from THAT you can learn.

 

[Liability]

Science is so hard for some on the right to grasp correctly

Honesty is so impossible for you to grasp at all.

 

[Liability]

More snow = greater precipitation = increased water vapor = more evaporation = more heat.

Oh, that's right, according to right wingers on this site, "evaporation" is a "wild theory". Sorry, I forgot.

Some years show more snow. Some years show less snow. Some years show droughts. Some show flooding. The amount of precipitation varies year to year. Thus, greater precipitation standing alone does not imply any global climate change at all.

But the fact that it is coming down as snow does suggest that it is, at present, pretty fucking cold.

And the fact that our winters seem to be getting colder also suggests that there is not a whole lot of global warming going on.

CrusaderFrank's formula would lead to the conclusion (which idiots like retardean would JUMP at): "a new ICE AGE is conclusive proof of global warming!"

If an allegedly scientific theory is not disprovable, is it valid as "science" retardean?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

New York snowstorm: New January record set as 19-inch snowfall pushes city past 1925 mark

The Kiss of Death for the EnviroMarxists and their Faux "ManMade Global Warming" Horse Shit