Poor writing can throw up a fog to hide dubious claims.
Prasad Menon
The Extravaganza of the Deakin Lectures is taking place at the moment in Melbourne, and Des Moore on Quadrant Online accused them of being a one-sided propaganda machine paid for by government money (though not in those exact words).
In response, the Wheeler Centre defended themselves on their blog*, and claimed that Quadrant’s missed the point: They don’t need to do the debating thing because bloggers do that (and they link to moi).
So the Wheeler unit, which is supported by the Victorian Government, EPA Victoria, Carbon Innovators Network, The Age, and the ABC et al defends a policy position taken by Government Departments, and minor clubs like, y’know, the UN, and yet it’s OK, there’s no fear of government funds being used to propagate a one-sided message, because JoNova is discussing the science (with no government funding, no industry sponsorship, and no university support). So that’s what they call balance.
The rest of us call it government advertising. It’s just a different form. A government-funded unit gets to use taxpayer dollars to prop up a government policy and help large investment funds and a stack of small businesses (friends) as well. Curiously, this is all supposedly relevant to Melbourne being designated a UNESCO city of Literature, whatever that is.
In any case, the Wheeler Centre may be a “Literature” initiative, but try doing a reading and comprehension test on their literature. Note how the second sentence appears to depend on the first…
The Deakin Lecture series in 2010 is not about debating climate science – there are plenty of bloggers already discussing that. Rather the Deakins are taking on board one of the pressing issues of our time and considering the impact that discussion is having on different spheres of modern life, from business and industry to our cities and farms.
Lets try to rephrase that: JoNova and other bloggers are debating whether carbon has any significant effect on our climate. It’s implicit (though unstated) that the outcome of the debate itself is irrelevant, because this lecture series assumes that this is a pressing issue of our time, and they are discussing the impact that that discussion (presumably the blog debate?) is having on…humanity. Got that?
For literati, they sure find it hard to put a coherent sentence together without throwing in a lot of assumptions, not to mention a few contradictions. Is this a disguised way for them to acknowledge the debate without acknowledging the debate? They’ve moved on from saying “The debate is over” to saying “There’s a debate about whether an issue is pressing or not, and we’ll discuss that pressing issue with experts from one side of the debate (though we call them diverse).” Watch for the vague references to “debate” and the illusion that there’s no bias…
Our speakers have been chosen for their track record of working within the context of the present debate, not because of any fixed political position on that debate.
Ahhh, so they picked “neutral” people”, like Prasad Menon, who heads up TATA. (The not-so-neutral Chairman Pachauri of the IPCC heads up TERI, and the T in TERI used to stand for TATA*. So Pachauri heads up what used to be a sub-unit of Menon’s company, and apparently still has close ties with it. TERI has won grants for dodgy glacier reports). Menon is apparently “difficult” to pigeonhole as a warmist (at least, if you are a warmist doing the pigeonholing). But, sure, let him speak. Just let’s not kid ourselves that he doesn’t have any interest in this.
Or there’s the impartial Stephen Joseph, who manages a company that works with sequestering carbon and is fittingly named Anthroterra. It’s lucky there’s no vested interest there either, right? And don’t forget David Blood, a senior partner of Generation Investment Management (yes, that is Al Gore’s fund management company). Baroness Amos is the British High Commissioner to Australia, and she’s said she doesn’t even want a debate about climate at all, and much less one the media reports on. The question is not whether the Wheeler Centre found a diverse spread of speakers, but whether they left out anyone from the Big-Scare-Campaign that could have possibly made it to Australia.
You can see the full list of presenters, which includes Tim Flannery and Malcolm-ETS-or-bust-Turnbull, along with a swag of “sustainable” architects, experts in renewable somethings, and even government secretaries of climate change. Go on, spot the skeptic.
There is a certain pettiness seeping throughout. After linking to Glikson’s start of the big debate on Quadrant, they don’t link to my reply to him; instead, they direct people to one of the most innocuous pages they can find on my site (so I beefed it up post hoc with links to the right pages). I wonder how many posts of mine they had to read to find that one. (I’m quite enjoying that thought). Their link to the Quadrant article returns a 404 error as well. Maybe they were just in a rush?
The religious fervor shines through, but sadly both science and literature are slogged in the race to sell the great carbon scare.
*Past tense added thanks to Paul at #23.
An irrelevant aside about the photo deleted. Unneccessary distraction.
* That link, now deleted was: http://wheelercentre.com/dailies/day/2010/5/27#post-129fc0b882c8
So, another disinterested discussion, can’t call it a debate, by some of Rudd’s ‘best and brightest’:-)
20
The scam continues as they pretend the game is different and a different pea is under a different cup. Its the same game, same pea, and same cup but different words are used. We are simply to stand by quietly and be the sacrificial goats who are to pay the costs of THEIR game with our lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.
In the long run, the game will end. In the short run, things are going to get increasingly ugly. The only question of interest is “will the game be ended before the long line of intended victims has been sacrificed and the last ounce of their created wealth consumed or destroyed?”
At the very least, let us not go quietly into that long dark night.
20
I for one, as well as many others, appreciate that you, JoAnne, have worked so hard to provide unpaid advertising on behalf of the TRUTH.
I have pointed out to my own government many times – that the EPA etc ought to be paying people to DISPROVE (if they can) the “rationale” behind anything EPA seeks to “regulate.” It’s in their own best interests to do so, but EPA of course would reject that notion instantly.
20
Don’t be afraid! If a regime tries to rape natural evolution then it always works: The supported is lingering, the oppressed is flourishing.
20
I know this is not exactly on topic, but I just found it. Looks like global warming will cause trouble for the human ilves. “The Earth will no longer be suitable for human ilves but there is no other planets to go. Hence, the result is human extinction.” This a “resolved” question at Yahoo answers. Duh…
20
And the URL is: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091225174604AASf5YU
20
I guess the Creator (or just plain chance) put coal under the ground but humans weren’t supposed to find it (or use it, more appropriately) Dagfinn.
Those darned inventors of the steam engine! If only they had the foresight NOT to use coal to make steam that could perform useful work.
If only they had the foresight to observe, “This is a pretty convenient source of heat, but if we burn it we will put CO2 in the air and eliminate the human race!”
True, there was short term gain
(like doubling the life expectancy of humans from about 35 years to some 70 years within a 50 year time span.)
But if people only knew that such “short term thinking” would ultimately lead to the end of the human race!
Sure, rodents survived climactic upheaval through about ten various epochs. But humans can’t be expected to adapt to anything.
Humans aren’t adaptable to change like rodents are.
20
The longer they go at this scam, the longer Labor tries to hold office, the more damaging it will be for them in the long run.
Was 5 degrees in Sydney this morning – near the coast (Lucas Heights). 7 degrees the night before, 6 degrees the night before that. Its been a long time since we started to get a run of temps down to that level. Joe Bastardi and others are warning of a large temperature drop in the next 12 – 18 months, with sea surface temps and upper atmospheric temps already dropping.
20
Yet another government sponsored echo chamber!
Looking in from the outside it’s clear the BS that supports up these rickety structures has already collapsed on those gathered within. It’s not going to be pretty sight when those inside realise what they are covered with.
20
Off topic
Is there a general contact e-mail address. I’d like to enquire about getting involved in a Vietnamese translation of “The Handbook”
20
It would seem that AGW has become a political and media, persona non grata. I guess it’s a bit hard to maintain a scientific debate when no science exists. It looks like your blog, is about to become a political blog Jo, rather than a scientific one. (Although AGW was always more political than scientific)
20
I think my adhom detector just went off on the Frankenstein remark. We’re not all photogenic – so what ? I look forward to you eviscerating his arguments not his photo.
20
twawki: @ 8
I’m inland northern NSW and I remarked to the long time locals that May was colder than normal. They reckoned it was more like how it was back in the 60s 70s.
20
Yeah Janama I think that’s whats happening as part of the cold PDO.
Many places in the northern hemisphere also had a frigid May and they are still getting snowstorms there in places. See here for more details;
http://www.iceagenow.com/index.htm
Also NZ snow fields are doing well already, well get our first decent falls today. Inland Australia is getting wetter too with Lake Eyre filling up again and so a lot more moisture/evaporation to be picked up and carried across to the eastern states.
20
twawki #8 Haven’t you realized yet? It is weather we don’t like that is a sure sign of GW and impure thought. So repent the change is your fault (mine too I guess)!
Jo would most likely know more about the changes in academia than I do but it seems to me that a change in western thought and belief is really what underlies all of this. There are more than two dismal sciences I am sure. I would name history as another, read Windschuttle’s “The killing of history”. Postmodernism seems to be an influence in of all this, you know if don’t know what happened make it up. Ames Franklin recent book is worth reading about what has happened. We have a failure in many sciences the old systems of discovery of fact have been deserted. Seems to a postmodernist it is quite reasonable to discuss “the impact that discussion is having on different spheres of modern life” because to such science is a social issue not a matter searching for truth.
I am not sure that this is same thing but computer models also greatly influence scientific belief. It seems that a set of mathematical equations when programmed into a computer model become scientific fact. Economics and Climatology are particularly victims of this. My computer experience of 30 years has been you can only be confident (note not sure) when you have many worked test examples to verify the output against. Neither economic models nor climate models can be verified in this manner and both are proving to be worthless. So I think increasingly academia believes and takes action on a virtual world which is of their own making.
Finally we must realize that God created Climatologists to make Economists look good, he failed we now believe in Astrology instead.
20
Keith: #12
June 9th, 2010 at 9:26 am
Eviscerating his arguments? He has no argument Keith. The man already has a monopoly on the supply of energy to one-fifth of the worlds population and stands to gain an unimaginable amount of money and power should the world embrace energy trading.
What’s happening with the Deakin lectures would be comical if it wasn’t so serious. Taking the p*ss out of ’em is quite appropriate. In fact I think Jo should finally take the gloves off and start swinging. But that’s just my opinion.
20
for readers’ interest from http://sppiblog.org/news/a-lawyers-examination-of-the-ipcc-evidence-for-man-made-global-warming
here’s a copy of the article and there’s a link to the paper on the site:
A Lawyer’s Examination of the IPCC “Evidence” for Man-made Global Warming
by Dennis Ambler
This is really very, very good, but politicians will not read it through, it is 79 pages long. It is a lawyer’s examination of the IPCC evidence as in a courtroom. He takes apart the IPCC conclusions and presents other evidence that disproves their insistence on incontrovertible evidence of AGW.
http://www.probeinternational.org/UPennCross.pdf
An example of his approach:
The Ability of Climate Models to Explain Past Climate
The IPCC and the climate establishment have vastly oversold climate models by declaring that such models are able to quite accurately reproduce past climates, including most importantly the warming climate of the late twentieth century. Mainstream climate modelers have themselves explained that climate models disagree tremendously in their predicted climate sensitivity – response of temperature to a CO2 increase – and are able to reproduce twentieth century climate only by assuming whatever (negative) aerosol forcing effect is necessary to get agreement with observations.
These kind of explanations, by leading climate modelers, suggest that climate models do not in fact reflect understanding of the key physical climate processes well enough to generate projections of future climate that one could rely upon. It seems unlikely that climate model projections would be accorded much policy significance if the way in which they were able to “reproduce” past climate was generally understood. It seems more than plausible that policymakers (let alone the general public), take a model’s purported ability reproduce past temperatures as an indication that the model’s assumption about climate sensitivity is correct.
If policymakers were told that this is not so, that ability to reproduce past temperatures indicates only that a particular pairing of assumptions about climate sensitivity and aerosol forcing allowed the reproduction of past temperatures, then the logical question would be: which model gets the correct pairing of sensitivity and aerosol forcing? In answer to this, climate modelers would have to say that they do not know, and the best that could be done would be to use all the models (this is called the ensemble approach). But of course it is possible that all the models were very badly wrong in what they assumed about sensitivity.
A policymaker aware of this would then have to ask whether it would be better to base policy on climate models, or a more naïve climate forecasting method, and whether further public funding of efforts to improve climate models was worthwhile.
The Existence of Significant Alternative Explanations for Twentieth Century Warming
The IPCC and the climate establishment story expresses great certainty in arguing that late twentieth century global warming was caused by the atmospheric buildup of human ghg emissions (this is the anthropogenic global warming or AGW story).
The IPCC reports confidently assert that solar activity could not have accounted for warming during this period, because this was a period of weakening and not strengthening solar 76 irradiance, and that there was no natural forcing during this period that could have accounted for the warming.
Yet a closer look at the literature shows that there is ongoing dispute about the possible role of the sun, with the debate coming down to conflicting views about the reliability of alternative datasets on solar activity. Perhaps even more importantly, a growing body of sophisticated theoretical work confirms that the nonlinear global climate is subject to inherent warm and cool cycles of about 20 to 30 years in duration, with substantial evidence that a warm cycle was likely to have begun in 1976.
The existence of alternative explanations for twentieth century warming obviously has enormous implications for policy, for in order to determine how much to spend to reduce human ghg emissions, one must know first have some idea how harmful those emissions will be if they continue unabated.
Questionable methodology underlying highly publicized projected impacts of global warming
One of the most widely publicized numbers in the establishment climate story is the projection that 20-30 per cent of plant and animal species now existing may become extinct due to global warming. This number is also one of the most troubling, because it comes from a single study whose methodological validity has been severely questioned by a large number of biologists. These biologists agree that the methodology neglects many key processes that determine how the number of species will respond to changing climate, and will always lead to an overestimate of species loss due to climatic change.
Among the most surprising and yet standard practices is a tendency in establishment climate science to simply ignore published studies that develop and/or present evidence tending to disconfirm various predictions or assumptions of the establishment view that increases in CO2 explain virtually all recent climate change.
Perhaps even more troubling, when establishment climate scientists do respond to studies supporting alternative hypotheses to the CO2 primacy view, they more often than not rely upon completely different observational datasets which they say confirm (or at least don’t disconfirm) climate model predictions.
We should not be using public money to pay for faster and faster computers so that increasingly fine-grained climate models can be subjected to ever larger numbers of simulations until we have got the data to test whether the predictions of existing models are confirmed (or not disconfirmed) by the evidence.
Policy carrying potential costs in the trillions of dollars ought not to be based on stories and photos confirming faith in models, but rather on precise and replicable testing of the models’ predictions against solid observational data.
20
The Deakin lectures is yet another admission by pro AGW that they have LOST THE DEBATE on the science.
Every sceptic is ready and willing to debate the science anytime, anywhere.
Almost every alarmist avoids debate. Consider how glad sceptics are when the odd alarmist stumbles into a debate.
One would think that pro-AGW would be happy to tear apart a sceptic at every opportunity, seeing as how the “science is settled” and all.
20
What surprises me the most, is that with Hopenchangen in ashes, ETS so unpalatable in the Australian electorate, that St Kevin of Gumboot Gully dropped it in terror like a taipan he picked up, thinking it was a stick to beat off a tigger snake, that they think these circle think debate are actually listened to by anyone that matters anymore.
THe death knell was probably the GFC for enviro alarmism and while Australia never felt that storm fury, the nations that did can’t afford enviro heroism anymore. Money talks bullshit walks and never more so in a continuing recession. Eurowoes and aminstreet America hardly recovering.
Kevin Rudd now mortally damaged, having done politics instead of conviction is stranded on neither side of the greatest moral challenge of our generation. Malcwarm Trunbull damaged forever but pretending he has a chance to white ant the boxer, in what is normally a blue collar sme business party. The party of personal investment.
They can self agree all they like, the debate has moved on and the real proof of this is Labor looking for circuit breakers everywhere else but climate.
The debate was a decade, too bad so sad, they lost but then they were always short of science anad facts, pesky little things like charts of measured data did not suit their argument and the Universe itself in disagreement.
You can’t even find a carbon exchange ad on the internet and it was like viagra and penis enlargement ads for years. Funny how large scale international fraud can close down commodity or pretend commodity trades.
But we shall not gloat just a wink wink and point at the scor board, of course a muttered, suffer in yer jocks may be appropriate.
Common sense 1 million, rubbish zero.
apol for length of post.
20
post #18 Baa humbug,
Recently I noticed that at a forum with a lot of discussions on climate stuff for AGW topics.There has been a sharp drop in replies by alarmist members.They especially avoid me now since I LOVE to point out things to them what they miss badly on.
They have totally avoided this THREAD that I started with a simple presentation showing that CO2 does not drive the climate.
It is a pity that they withdraw from discussions,but not realize they have been a victim of the AGW propaganda
20
Baa Humbug.
You take a boomerang to a fight, that’s your choice.
Spears are better.
20
May Climate data: little change
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/may_data_little_change/
20
Jo,
Just a correction as someone else may use the error to debunk the article. The T in TERI no longer stands for TATA just for “The”. Although it was originally established as “TATA Energy and Resources Institute”, apparently TATA severed its direct connection with TERI some time ago. However, according to Dr Pachauri there is still a “close link with the TATA Group”.This was covered in some of the blog comment on Dr Pachauri during his recent problems. I have seen it on Roger Pielke Jr’s blog.
20
Keith: #21
June 9th, 2010 at 11:15 am
Well Keith that’s certainly true in most instances, but to take the humour further, when the enemy is running away, out of spear range, a couple of good boomerangs will do the trick.
Sunset thnx for the link. Maybe they’ve circled the wagons at realclimate, tamino and your ABC lol.
20
add on ABC’s taxpayer-funded daily advertising:
8 June: ABC: Oysters could offer carbon offset option
A study from the University of South Australia says the oyster industry could look at a new revenue stream by selling carbon credits from the shellfish.
Thesis author James Hickey says oysters collect carbon from the ocean to grow their shells.
He says this could be a big business venture, particularly in areas where oysters grow thick and fast.
“An area like Ceduna where there’s perhaps more nutrients or better water – clearer water or better conditions for the oysters – then you will get faster growth,” he said.
“And therefore, if you were selling carbon credits through this process, you get a higher amount of money for your tonne of carbon or whatever measurement is used.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/08/2921629.htm
8 June: ABC: Clean coal projects funded
Ten projects worth $13 million have been funded by the NSW State Government as part of the rush to clean up carbon emissions from the coal industry….
More about those projects on The Country Hour tomorrow and online at abc.net.au/rural.
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/content/2010/s2921412.htm?site=sydney
20
twawki,
Here’s some more observational evidence of N hemisphere cooling. I was in the Sierra Nevada mountains over the weekend and the snow pack is still very big. Not because we’ve had well above normal precipitation, but because it’s been an unusually cool spring. I was able to ski terrain in the back country that normally wouldn’t still have snow this time of year. Sacramento CA never got above 89F for the entire month of May. Truckee, just got above 70F for the first time last weekend, at it’s only at about 6200′, although surrounded by snow covered peaks.
It seems to be the result of the Arctic Oscillation, which appears to be pushing the jet stream a little further South and preventing the pacific high from being strongly established. We’ve been getting small storm systems and clouds when it’s normally the dry season which is reducing the solar energy reaching the ground. It’s also keeping the snow from melting, which is reflecting even more surface energy. This is all creating extreme local cooling in the mountains which is extending it’s influence into the nearby desert of the central valley.
George
20
BH, 19
On a blog which i consider to be one of the last bastions of AGW i posted a link about Dr Roy Spencer and his work regarding sensitivity, the lead witch burner replied by saying Spencer is a creationist. I countered that claim and this is his response.
“And as for pointing out Roy Spencer’s creationism; you’re right, it would be an ad hominem attack *if* I were saying it proves him wrong. It does not; I realize that. But it says much of his credibility.”
This is what passes for debate nowadays, shant be too long before people like this are only found huddled together in dark corners of the internet practising a long forgotten religion.
Cheers
PS To Jo, you know you are doing something right when you get a mention like this. Keep up the good fight a lot of people are counting on you.
20
Pat at 25,
I have a study here somewhere that shows increased carbon in the oceans will lead to acidification, where does that leave the oyster farmers? Any witch burner here care to comment on this latest piece of hypocrisy?
CO2isnotevil,
What you have just described is “climate change” and we all know what causes “climate change”, there is nothing to debate here.
Head witch burner.
20
crakar24,
What I’ve actually described is a local change in weather patterns. However, climate change is just the combined result of widespread local weather pattern variability, generally induced by a changes in the local energy balance.
Along these lines, I’ve been thinking about how apply the same kinds of analysis used to show how rogue waves can emerge from chaotically related wave functions to similar functions describing chaotically related local weather pattern variability. Of course, when it comes to simulating long term climate change, modeling the chaos is counterproductive, although this mechanism could explain some kinds of short term ‘climate change’. Long term climate change simulations must use relatively long time steps (on the order of weeks), so that the chaos averages out, and stick to the high level thermodynamic considerations, for example, COE.
George
20
The Bolta belts flannery today on Melb mtr and proves what a liar and fraudster he really is, amazing when you add up the fairy tale books this fool has written and also gets his his own TV show on their abc.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/mtr_today28/#commentsmore
20
There were a couple thousand of us out at the Hyatt an hour ago:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/7371089/rally-told-rudd-should-axe-the-tax/
Somewhat a unique perspective for me having a former student lecture me (as part of the crowd) from the back of a truck. Hopefully the press will send a bit of a message to Rudd… 7, 9, ABC etc were all there.
There were speakers including those from from Atlas Iron (Dave Flanagan), BC Iron, FMG (Twiggy), CCIWA, REIWA, Gina Rhinehart and more. I see ABC has a thread running already:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/09/2922441.htm
20
Just when I thought they’d lost touch with reality, comes this.
Yes, Ladies and Gentlemen. As a sweetener, Komrade Rudd and the commissariat appear to have offered to make us, the taxpayers liable for 40% of any costs associated with an environmental disaster like the one in the gulf of Mexico.
Uhmmm… No freakin way Mr Rudd! Seriously.
20
It’s interesting Tim Flannery is promoting a solar plough when the advanced green farmers have stopped ploughing and use direct drilling as it conserves energy and ploughing releases CO2 to the atmosphere.
20
“janama”, I reccon that Flannery has a “brain” that is powered by alternative energy……..
It certainly doesn’t work very efficiently!
20
Tim Tam’s first degree was majoring in English. He then went onto Paleo what ever. He didn’t start from a science background A person who was responsible for the grant money to Tim said , being an English graduate, he is a specialist in B$.
20
Thanks to Paul in #23. I’ve updated the post regarding TATA and TERI.
And I also took out the irrelevant line about the photo. I did wake up thinking that the post would be better without it. So yes, Kieth #12, fair point. It’s not technically an ad hom, but it is an irrelevant distraction, “a cheap shot” as it were. I had removed it before I saw your comment,but the feedback is useful. I’m normally more careful. Thanks 🙂 JN
20
janama:
June 9th, 2010 at 9:52 am
twawki: @ 8
twawki:
June 9th, 2010 at 10:01 am
I think the pair of you are both off your heads! Hanson says 2010 could be hottest on record.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/paper/gistemp2010_draft0601.pdf
Now please excuse me while I go down to the shed, I need to find a tyre lever or similar. I need to remove my tongue from where it’s stuck firmly inside my cheek.
20
Bob Malloy: #37
June 9th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Or you could grab a thermometre, apply a blowtorch to it, get a photo taken with the caption…
mmmm there might be a T-Shirt transfer business there
10
crakar24 @ 27:
Isn’t that some spectacular logic? Wow! Perhaps you should link to that so we can trample that brilliant thought.
10
“janama”, I reccon that Flannery has a “brain” that is powered by alternative energy……..
It certainly doesn’t work very efficiently!
Dunno, Bill. It’s made him a shirtload more money than I’m ever going to see.
I suppose it’s all about how you measure things, eh?
10
Not only Hansen but our very own BoM parrot, David Jones climate “scientist” reckons the same, and the year isn’t half way through yet!
10
Baa Humbug @ 38
There`s one official thermometer left and James Hansen`s got it stuck the same place as His head .
I pulled the random collection of headings below off Robert Felix`s site iceagenow.com (links to all the articles are on his site)
Record snow base at Mt Washington, BC
3 Apr 10 – So much snow that they’ve extended their ski season.
Siberia – 2nd harshest winter in 110 years … Perhaps ever – 9 Apr 10 – “The winter of 2009-10 was one of the most severe in the European part of Russia for more than 30 years, and in Siberia it was perhaps the record-breaking coldest ever,” said Alexander Frolov, head of state meteorological service Rosgidromet.
11 April 2010 in Alberta from Calgary to Fort McMurray, in Central-north Saskatchewan and snow in northwestern Ontario. McMurray Alberta received over 30 centimeters(1 FOOT) in just 24 hours. The roads were so bad that cars had to be left at malls,
More SNOW for northern England and Scotland – 13 Apr 10 – The coldest winter in 31 years has a final sting in the tail. Positive Weather Solutions senior forecaster Jonathan Powell said: “It will turn decidedly cold for northern England and Scotland from the weekend and into next week with a chilling blast of northerly air.”
Snow in eastern Japan in Mid April – More like February than April
8 Apr 10 – Hi, I am living in Japan and we got about 1-2 inches of snow here in the mountains and even on the plains something that is very rare for mid April. Many other parts of Japan have also had snow and temps that are on average 6.oC below normal for this time of year. In fact the last few days have been more like February than April!
Coldest in Korea in 100 years – 28 Apr 10 – The entire Korean Peninsula is shattering its previous cold-weather records. Seoul reported a midday high high of 7.8 C (46 F) today, while Daejoen, 170 kilometers to the south, recorded a mid-day high of 6.7 C (44 F), the lowest for late April since 1908, according to the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA).
Third major snowstorm in Calgary this month – 26 cm by tonight – 28 Apr 10 – Forecasting 26 cm (10.2 inches) of snow by tonight, Environment Canada warned of “dangerous winter weather conditions” for Calgary and surrounding areas, with up to 40 cm of snow expected along the southern Foothills and in the Lethbridge and Cardston areas.
“Very rare” snow in 18 municipalities in Mexico – 2 May 10 very rare May snowfall in many municipalities of the State of Chihuahua (18 to be exact, in a territory bigger than the U.K.) including the capital city of Chihuahua, where more than 15 centimetres of snow and sleet fell. That is something so rare and has been happening with more frequency. This winter we had the coldest temperature in my city since 1996; the thermometre dropped all the way to -5C. And in the city of Saltillo, Coahuila, just a few hours south it dropped to -7C with snow.
Snow in the south of France… in May ! ! ! !
4 May 10 – Toulouse
Today temps dived to 1°C in Carcassonne, with big flakes à noon ! ! IN MAY ! !
Snow In Southern France – 5 May 10 – Snow on the city of Carcassone and in South-Western France – “a rare phenomenon this time of year”.
1ºC was registered at the airport of Tarbes-Lourdes, a record low for a 4th of May since measurements started in 1946.
Snow in “sunny” Spain – Coldest May since records began – 6 May 10 – After a warm spell at the end of April, old man winter made a comeback in May.
The State of Catalonia, Spain, experienced the coldest temperatures for the month of May since records exists.
Provincial capitals registered the following minima: 0ºC in Salamanca, 0.3ºC in Ávila, 0.8ºC in Burgos and Segovia, 1.8ºC in Soria, 2ºC in Guadalajara and Valladolid, 3ºC in Cuenca, 3,3ºC in Teruel, and 3.7ºC in Albacete. This was accompanied by snow in many parts of Northern Spain.
UK – Coldest winter in a lifetime – Freezing in May- 12 May 10
Snow and frost bring winter chill to May. Snowflakes fluttered down on Tyneside, with more snow forecast for the Scottish highlands.
Record Cold in Paris – 11 May 10 – The temperature did not exceed 7.6°C (45.7F) in Paris which is a record cold for a May 11, beating the record cold of May 11, 1984 where the temperature did not exceed 8.4°C (47.1F).
3 jun 10 – California “Water officials this week are keeping a close eye on Shasta Lake. The surrounding watershed holds a snowpack nearly four times larger than normal.”
4 Jun 10 – At Storlien-Visjövalen ski resort in central Sweden, the last of the snow finally melted away on Wednesday, making it the longest continuous period of snow cover in the region for at least 60 years, according to the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI).
Many parts of Sweden also endured a record number of days with of sub-zero temperatures this past winter. The northern Swedish towns of Sveg and Delsbo had 84 and 71 consecutive days of minus temperatures, while the Härjedalen town of Sveg endured sub-zero temperatures from December 13th to March 6th – the longest consecutive period since records began in 1875.
Austria’s Sonnblick, more than 3,000 meters above sea level, now has 665 cm of snow depth, a June record.
Record-breaking June freeze in Korea – 4 Jun 10
And as the Southern hemisphere has only just started it`s winter I`d like to know how the @%$# Hansen can say warmest year yet and expect anyone to believe Him !
And they`ve got the cheek to call Us deniers.
10
Its a little late today Jo and all but WUWT is reporting a Pen State Professor of Law has eviscerated the “scientific” claims of the IPCC etc.
(“A cross examination of global warming science conducted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Institute for Law and Economics has concluded that virtually every claim advanced by global warming proponents fail to stand up to scrutiny.”)
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/08/legal-beagle-says-manmade-global-warming-science-doesn%E2%80%99t-withstand-scrutiny/
I so want to see a Youtube of tomorrow mornings coffee break at Pen State!
Legal Beagles involved at last…… THE END!
Sorry but I must now pop back to the UK’s Guardian to see how Monbiot handles this one…….Life just gets better!! Have a cool evening all!
10
Very hard to push “Global Warming” and carbon credits when most of the world are freezing their butts off.
10
Waylander: #42
June 9th, 2010 at 10:16 pm
Nice list. Not to mention the poor ba*tards in Mongolia. harshest winter their old folks can remember. Millions of stock frozen to death. A real calamity there. THEY NEED SOME GLOBAL WARMING.
But hey, I’ll bet Jimmy “data distorter” H will find some nook and cranny in the world that’s 0.5DegC warmer than usual, extrapolate that to….mmmmmmmmm 12,000 km and hey presto, warmest year on record.
Houdini and Merlin eat your hearts out.
10
Haha Hansen has destroyed his own credibility and is taking that of NASAs down with him as well. Already his claims have been debunked as pure fantasy. But as many say to claim it is the hottest year ever when the year is not even half over is utter desperation. The reality is ocean temps are plummeting and we have a cold La Nina building – it looks like the Northern Hemisphere will be in for a shocker of a winter – I think the alarmists know their time is short and are trying whatever they can in the meantime to try and shore up opinion for their lies. Problem is they discredit themselves even more by their antics.
10
Subject: GLOBAL WARMING FRAUDSTER JAMES HANSEN SHOULD BE JAILED FOR FRAUD!!!!!!!!!!
THIS GLOBAL WARMING LUNATIC ACTIVIST JAMES HANSEN PREDICTS 2010 TO THE HOTTEST YEAR YET……
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/the-warmest-year-yet-says-nasa-20100603-x7f5.html
WHAT PLANET DOES THIS MORON LIVE ON!!
JAMES HANSEN SHOULD BE JAILED FOR FRAUD!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This year we have even seen snow in Autumn:-
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/general/first-snow-falls-in-the-mountains/1823434.aspx
Winter has only just started in Australia and indications are that it will be a bumper ski season!
Early snow falls raise hopes for a great season…:-
http://accommodationfallscreek.com.au/2010/06/04/early-snow-falls-raise-hopes-for-a-great-season%E2%80%A6/
10