Global Warming doesn't Blast UK w/ most Fall snow since WW2

[Ed Mahmoud]

Snow in the UK






Yes, the Daily Mail article says Global Warming is to blame...


Edit to add- Ok, Daily Mail has updated story, as recently as yesterday, and no longer blames October snow in UK on Global Warming. So edited thread title.

[KWT]

Its pretty rare to see snow *falling* yet alone settling in southern England yet thats exactly what happened yesterday eveing. I happened to only get a sleety mess but places just to my NW got settling snow.

Fair to say it was a pretty exceptional event to have a airmass cold enough at this time of year to give such a decent snow event by UK standards.

Thats the 2nd out of season snow event we've had in 2008, the other came in April.

[Sanibel]

Global Warming increases "amplitude" (the strength and energy in weather features) therefore being able to pull colder air further down out of season and throw normal patterns out of wack. So, yes, as counterintuitive as it sounds, this could be due to global warming and more energy being deposited into the atmosphere.

This could (but not definitely) explain unseasonable cold fronts in Florida too. Places in the Catskill Mountains in New York received 20 inches of snow yesterday.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

I agree Sanibel. Global Warming would energize the jet stream meaning
extreme temperature variations- very hot in the summer,
very cold in the winter. That is where the energy would go.

[P.K.]

Several hours of snow here last night. I read somewhere this is the first time snow has fallen in London in Oct since 1934. I've never seen snow this early here either.

[Ed Mahmoud]

Well, it is good to know that whether the weather is hot, cold, mild, normal or extreme, is can all be blamed on global warming.


I do know from reading around the relatively recent warming episode that seems to have started to level off in the last decade seems to have preceded the increase in CO2 that resulted from the Industrial Revolution.

[x-y-no]

Yes, the Daily Mail article says Global Warming is to blame...

I searched the article for "global warming" and "climate change" and didn't find anything. Care to supply a quote to support this statement?

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

The following is based on my amateur 20 year old college student knowledge
and is not official:

Ed it is much more than that- it is about the jet stream creating extreme events,
not so much mild/cool/warm events, but frigid and hot....

It is about the thermodynamic physics, and global warming is a very real danger.
Extreme events seem to support this idea. Energized Jet Streams are dangerous.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

This has nothing what so ever to do with "global warming", it has not warmed hardly at all in 10 years; I would say based on the solar mins and maxs falling within a 'point' to match closely global temperature changes. with the help of weather patterns and ocean patterns throughout the limited data we have that only goes' back about a hundred years if that. Based on this the weather and climate patterns of earth seem to follow that very closely indeed. I would strongly agrue against any 5-6c degrees' of warming over 92 years, unless something huge happens, like the sun starting its' red giant cycle, or something weird happens. It won't happen IMO. People that think it will have to back it up with facts on why they think so, because even coming out of the little ice age in the late 18th and early 19th centuries time period with a warming of .6c during the 20th century, with all the co2 pumped into the Atmosphere. Using common sense at most .8-1.0c of warming should happen over the next 100 years; it is likely that no more then half that will happen. In of course that could go the other way if something changes. We can never tell.

Based on these facts, I don't understand why people should "force" tens of trillions of dollars in economic changes for it. It makes no sense. Let the free market work it out.

[Ed Mahmoud]

Yes, the Daily Mail article says Global Warming is to blame...

I searched the article for "global warming" and "climate change" and didn't find anything. Care to supply a quote to support this statement?

By Daily Mail Reporter and David Derbyshire
Last updated at 2:27 AM on 30th October 2008

Did you ever stop to think even some EuroSoc global warming hysterics decided that blaming a pre-Halloween snowstorm on Global Warming was a little too much and they edited it out?

I noted also the claim that the migration of swans from Siberia to the UK being altered by global warming has also disappeared.

But I'll edit the title.

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

This has nothing what so ever to do with "global warming", it has not warmed hardly at all in 10 years; I would say based on the solar mins and maxs falling within a 'point' to match closely global temperature changes. with the help of weather patterns and ocean patterns throughout the limited data we have that only goes' back about a hundred years if that. Based on this the weather and climate patterns of earth seem to follow that very closely indeed. I would strongly agrue against any 5-6c degrees' of warming over 92 years, unless something huge happens, like the sun starting its' red giant cycle, or something weird happens. It won't happen IMO. People that think it will have to back it up with facts on why they think so, because even coming out of the little ice age in the late 18th and early 19th centuries time period with a warming of .6c during the 20th century, with all the co2 pumped into the Atmosphere. Using common sense at most .8-1.0c of warming should happen over the next 100 years; it is likely that no more then half that will happen. In of course that could go the other way if something changes. We can never tell.

Based on these facts, I don't understand why people should "force" tens of trillions of dollars in economic changes for it. It makes no sense. Let the free market work it out.

Over the past decade there have been both record extreme lows, record snowfalls in winter even in Baghdad, also
record heat in summer that is highly brutal. Also a report released by the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change supports this with tons of scientists involved. http://www.ipcc.ch/
That is why I feel that global warming is a serious problem that is impacting
many millions of people via floods/brutal temperatures/etc.

I'm just one of the messengers warning about this serious crisis...because it is a serious
crisis...don't shoot the messenger

[Aslkahuna]

The problem with the GW argument is that a goodly percentage of those on both extremes of the debate have no clue at all about the Physics involved. Sanibel is correct about the energy excess resulting in increased amplitude which would favor stronger extreme events superimposed upon a general warming trend. However, there are factors besides the human one involved and these can cause temporary changes in the direction of the trend. BTW, one will not have to wait until the Solar Red Giant phase before Earth is uninhabitable. Solar Luminosity will increase by 50% over the next few hundred million years which is long before the RG stage.

Steve

[vbhoutex]

This has nothing what so ever to do with "global warming", it has not warmed hardly at all in 10 years; I would say based on the solar mins and maxs falling within a 'point' to match closely global temperature changes. with the help of weather patterns and ocean patterns throughout the limited data we have that only goes' back about a hundred years if that. Based on this the weather and climate patterns of earth seem to follow that very closely indeed. I would strongly agrue against any 5-6c degrees' of warming over 92 years, unless something huge happens, like the sun starting its' red giant cycle, or something weird happens. It won't happen IMO. People that think it will have to back it up with facts on why they think so, because even coming out of the little ice age in the late 18th and early 19th centuries time period with a warming of .6c during the 20th century, with all the co2 pumped into the Atmosphere. Using common sense at most .8-1.0c of warming should happen over the next 100 years; it is likely that no more then half that will happen. In of course that could go the other way if something changes. We can never tell.

Based on these facts, I don't understand why people should "force" tens of trillions of dollars in economic changes for it. It makes no sense. Let the free market work it out.

Over the past decade there have been both record extreme lows, record snowfalls in winter even in Baghdad, also
record heat in summer that is highly brutal. Also a report released by the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change supports this with tons of scientists involved. http://www.ipcc.ch/
That is why I feel that global warming is a serious problem that is impacting
many millions of people via floods/brutal temperatures/etc.

I'm just one of the messengers warning about this serious crisis...because it is a serious
crisis...don't shoot the messenger :wink:

No, you are not just a messenger. You are one of who has an opinion about this, not one who can prove it is a serious crisis. Opinions do not make it so.

[Bunkertor]

Same in Switzerland.

Highest amount of snow dumped in an October since 50 years. Wiedespread more than half a meter.

[MGC]

So, if indeed the October 2008 London snow is GW induced, explain the 1934 event? This has happened before, so to explain its occurance on excessive CO2 don't cut it. The Earth is not warming, despite what the chicken littles are telling the masses. Expect below normal temperatures this winter in North America.....MGC

[jinftl]

I believe that as a society, we need to be more eco-conscious and green....and maybe that is the ultimate intent of reports that link a particular weather event to global warming...but other than implicitly stressing the need to be 'green' by showing the consequences already happening, extreme weather has and always will take place. There are enough dynamics in the atmosphere without globabl warming to produce heat waves, cold waves, monster storms and droughts, etc.

It is so hard to link a weather event in one city, state, country to an overall global climate change. Take last week...record temps were being reported in some cities in the U.S. Southeast. At the same time, record highs were being reported in Southern California.

More than an 'event', it is long-term observation of overall pattern and temperature change that will indicate if there is any global warming or cooling. Even then, climate change has been a reality since the earth was formed, the full extent of what is man-made and what is earth-made climate change would then need to be debated.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

Same in Switzerland.

Highest amount of snow dumped in an October since 50 years. Wiedespread more than half a meter.

Solar min having a effect I believe.

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

I believe that as a society, we need to be more eco-conscious and green....and maybe that is the ultimate intent of reports that link a particular weather event to global warming...but other than implicitly stressing the need to be 'green' by showing the consequences already happening, extreme weather has and always will take place. There are enough dynamics in the atmosphere without globabl warming to produce heat waves, cold waves, monster storms and droughts, etc.

It is so hard to link a weather event in one city, state, country to an overall global climate change. Take last week...record temps were being reported in some cities in the U.S. Southeast. At the same time, record highs were being reported in Southern California.

More than an 'event', it is long-term observation of overall pattern and temperature change that will indicate if there is any global warming or cooling. Even then, climate change has been a reality since the earth was formed, the full extent of what is man-made and what is earth-made climate change would then need to be debated.

Nothing is more green then nuclear power!!! We have to think about effectiveness and keeping the cost low on us people. Anyways it would cut co2 big time.

[Bunkertor]

Same in Switzerland.

Highest amount of snow dumped in an October since 50 years. Wiedespread more than half a meter.

Solar min having a effect I believe.

Solar min ?

[Tampa Bay Hurricane]

I am a messenger- a messenger of Fact, not opinion. It has been already proved so many
times that global warming is a serious crisis- and I'll prove it yet again- melting glaciers, flooding,
extreme weather, violent energy added to the jet stream, monster tornadoes- and the 1930s heat wave-
that is the industrial revolution of the 1800s that added heat to a warm cycle:

http://www.pollutionissues.com/Ho-Li/Industry.html

Industrial Revolution
During the Industrial Revolution of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, pollution became a major problem with the introduction of the steam engine and a series of technological advances that led to the production of goods shifting from homes and small factories to large industrial factories. The invention of more productive processes to manufacture cotton textiles contributed greatly to the number of mills located in England, and later in the northeastern United States. The steam engine allowed capitalists to transfer their manufacturing plants away from naturally flowing waters (outside the city) to areas inside and around cities where more abundant labor was available. Pollution increased because of the more concentrated conditions within the industrializing cities and because of the use of artificially produced power (such as coal) that replaced the natural power of fast-running rivers.

IPCC has some strong arguments, and it will be a serious crisis if many people are affected
by extreme weather events...that are unprecedented. A geological survey of forestation the area
impacted by Katrina concluded that it was indeed the most violent storm in terms of overall
energy in 300+ years. There had to be record heat to yield record heat content and record ssts
in the GOM in 2005, which I remember approached 100 F in some swampy regions.
It is pure fact that many of these disasters are unprecedented:

Source:
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=3877592

Worst Forest Disaster in U.S. History
Hurricane Katrina Destroyed Millions of Trees, Increasing Climate Change

When Hurricane Katrina slammed into the Gulf Coast two years ago, the storm devastated 320 million trees.
Now the United States is suffering the worst forest catastrophe in its history, according to a new analysis by the journal Science.

Using satellite images, scientists found that more than 5 million acres of trees were destroyed across Mississippi and Alabama. Experts said it would take decades for the plant life to recover, and some areas may be permanently damaged.

"An area of the state of Maine was affected, and that's a huge area," said George Hurt, an ecologist who was also a co-author the Science study. "More than 10 times the size, for example, of what was affected by the California wildfires recently. So this is a huge event."

But of even more concern is that these fallen forests will have soon released as much carbon dioxide back into the air -- 367 million tons of it -- as all the rest of U.S. forests absorb in an entire year. Trees capture carbon dioxide, which they turn into oxygen and use to create wood and leaves. As this fallen lumber starts to decay, they release these greenhouse gases into the air, which in turn hastens climate change.


Feedback Loop
"It is an irony that the change we may see as the climate warms, with increased storms of this magnitude, could be accelerating the source of the emissions that create the change, so the change could be accelerating itself," said Glenn Prickett, a forestry expert for Conservation International.

Deforestation already accounts for nearly one in every five tons of carbon dioxide that humanity worldwide puts into the atmosphere. And Katrina's wake has now added to this deforestation. Such hurricanes become more likely, say many scientists, as global warming accelerates due to greenhouse gas emissions. Scientists call this phenomenon a feedback loop; the warmer it gets, the more likely that storms could kill more forests, which would release even more greenhouse gas. "A major source of greenhouse gases that are contributing to climate change is actually the loss of forests," Prickett said.

Even Katrina was influenced by extreme record hot temperatures...and unlike many say...this
evidence of energy-power-extremity can be directly linked
to some form of warming- note that the total damage was
far worse than Camille, the Labor Day Hurricane, or Andrew- this is forestry alone, which means
this occurence is not influenced by the fact of more people living on the water, because
the study was limited to trees- not homes, which obviously have increased since the 1930s.

Now it might be a natural cycle of heating, slightly exacerbated. So in that case an extreme event is due
to this cycle, exacerbated by anthropological factors.