tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post6591423344554739846..comments2024-03-18T22:50:29.792-07:00Comments on Cliff Mass Weather Blog: Scary Snowpack Stories (Updated June 14)Cliff Mass Weather Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13948649423540350788noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-89888718456930790072011-06-21T16:30:00.090-07:002011-06-21T16:30:00.090-07:00Can you please send me the exact references of the...Can you please send me the exact references of the papers you cite in your blog so I can read them too. Thank you.Dominiquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18086376743520871760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-24368351556068553972011-06-16T10:00:20.830-07:002011-06-16T10:00:20.830-07:00>And please don't cite Christy.<
Disagr...>And please don't cite Christy.<<br /><br />Disagree with this blanket statement. However Christy published the CA snowpack paper in Energy & Environment. Only ~ 25 libraries in the entire world subscribe to that, with good reason. E&E doesn't make the ISI list of science journals, which consists of thousands of journals. E&E isn't tallied by the ISI citation index, so practicing scientists would either read nor use it.Jay Althttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11146408415375034447noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-72072320433285764682011-06-16T07:07:49.056-07:002011-06-16T07:07:49.056-07:00Cliff, care to weigh-in yet on the subject of the ...Cliff, care to weigh-in yet on the subject of the recent claim about a coming "lull" in solar cycle?<br /><br />http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/would-solar-lull-snuff-climate-action/?nl=opinion&emc=tyb1<br /><br />ThanksJohn McBridehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09503331313775640577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-41367878934856987442011-06-14T20:15:53.971-07:002011-06-14T20:15:53.971-07:00Very interesting anaysis. Thank you Cliff.
I migh...Very interesting anaysis. Thank you Cliff. <br />I might add that this June we are still skiing at Crystal Mountain with a 120 inch base at the top. This has been a record year with a season total of 612 inches. Although the current extensive PNW snowpack is likely the result of pdo/la nina 'weather' and not 'climate' I think everyone should take a look at this breaking news from Space.com regarding Solar Cycle 24 and the prospect put forth by the American Astromomical Society that Livingston and Penn may have been correct all along - we may be headed toward a second Maunder Minimum. <br />http://www.space.com/11960-fading-sunspots-slower-solar-activity-solar-cycle.htmlBC Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10138305415926969800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-5703645791113266512011-06-14T16:22:50.341-07:002011-06-14T16:22:50.341-07:00to echo Ruthless (I think)
The reality of global ...to echo Ruthless (I think)<br /><br />The reality of global warming is not threatened by probability that this snowpack paper is being over-interpreted.<br /><br />Lots of papers in Science and Nature are inconclusive or wrong, but many more are right.<br /><br />The point is that progress is hard to track, and non-specialists should look to the specialists in cases like global warming rather than to ill-informed politicians with an economic axe to grind.<br /><br />Non-specialists (like me in this case) should listen for the consensus and learn rather than draw conclusions from every NYT headline.John Vidalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09871768524749705799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-10807372867168611382011-06-14T12:08:01.813-07:002011-06-14T12:08:01.813-07:00The worldview-shattering thing about climate chang...The worldview-shattering thing about climate change comes not from some question of marginal snowpack changes in our mountains, but from the broader picture of where we're headed.<br /><br />In the grand scheme of things, these snowpack reductions are nearly inconsequential sideshows, water management problems notwithstanding.<br /><br />The nature of our situation only starts to come into focus when you ask yourself (honestly) what are the chances of atmospheric CO2 hitting ~1000 ppm, and what happens to that planet in that case.<br /><br />As it stands now, a total warming of at least 2 C is virtually unavoidable. We could shut off the CO2 taps now and still see that.<br /><br />Given the deteriorating state of various carbon stores (methane hydrates, forests, soils, permafrost), what is the chance those will not vent enough carbon to bring us to 1000 ppm?<br /><br />In other words, we are right now on the cusp of natural carbon feedbacks going beyond the control of humans.<br /><br />The last ice age was perhaps 6 C cooler than now.<br /><br />The expectation, based on the paleo record, is that 1000 ppm would cause 16 C warming.<br /><br />When you study that sufficiently that you understand it is real, that we may not be able to avoid it, and what that means for living on the planet, it hits you in the gut pretty hard.<br /><br />See here, for example:<br />http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6014/158.full (Science, Jan 14, 2011, p. 158).<br /><br />P.S. Cliff, as a subject for a future post, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on the possibility that our winters are being affected by changes in circulation and conditions in the Arctic, and how (and whether) the AO ties in with that.Ruthlesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02677203190698094216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-5757646959557472092011-06-14T09:15:02.033-07:002011-06-14T09:15:02.033-07:00There are (1) the article's statements, and ...There are (1) the article's statements, and (2) news reports, including statements by the authors.<br /><br />The paper is speculative and perhaps overinterpreted but accurate, the reports cross the line, here from Reuters, for example, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/09/us-usa-snowpack-melt-idUSTRE7587B820110609:<br /><br /><i>The declines can be attributed to unusual springtime warming caused by man-made climate change and come during the summer, which is the period of highest demand for water in the West, it said.<br /><br />"The more we increase temperature, the earlier we melt out our snow pack and the less of it there is to get though our warm dry summers," said USGS scientist Gregory Pederson, the lead author of the study.</i><br /><br />Essentially, this warming is caused by man and will parch late summers in the western US - which seems overreaching for the data in the paper.<br /><br />Just from a quick perusal, the article claims no precedent for "north-south synchrony", which seems to mean all three regions dipped when anthropogenic influence was strong, compared to similar or even stronger and longer dips from 1900-1950 on just two of the three regions (Fig 1, right frame).<br /><br />Usually, if a scientist tried to claim 3 out of 3 is significantly more significant than 2 out of 3 given only one sample of each and thresholds selected after the fact, they would be laughed out of the room.John Vidalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09871768524749705799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-62641409354715282212011-06-14T08:55:34.743-07:002011-06-14T08:55:34.743-07:00@ Phil:
Probably wrong???
The reconstruction is ...@ Phil:<br /><br />Probably wrong???<br /><br />The reconstruction is probably wrong, or your impression of what the study says is probably wrong?<br /><br />The only thing this study "does" is identifies snowpack behavior which is "almost unprecedented" in the study period:<br /><br />"In summary, our reconstructions highlight the unusual<br />nature of snowpack declines in northern watersheds and<br />synchronous snowpack losses across the entire cordillera<br />since the 1980s . . ."<br /><br />They find it is due to warming, but to not claim to prove a link between CO2 and warming. That's been done elsewhere, and is NOT the focus of this paper.Ruthlesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02677203190698094216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-78165128243174345972011-06-14T08:29:54.230-07:002011-06-14T08:29:54.230-07:00While I appreciate your skepticism, I think you ar...While I appreciate your skepticism, I think you are being a little too critical of the authors' conclusions. The long term data (which is the point of looking at tree rings) seems (to me) to indicate that there is a reduction in tree growth in the last 100 years or so. If you feel uncomfortable tying that to anthropogenic warming, that is understandable, but I think you are going too far in trying to deflate the importance of the results. <br /><br />Jeff RichardsonJeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05477013963212151740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-74336294368900839992011-06-14T06:29:17.607-07:002011-06-14T06:29:17.607-07:00Assuming Cliff's analysis is correct, this is ...Assuming Cliff's analysis is correct, this is just example number X (where X is a very large number) of Science (and Nature) publishing a story that's neat, sexy and probably wrong. The world's two "leading" scientific journals have a peer review process that regularly fails, and the high profile of both journals encourages scientists to submit research that tells a sexy story, sometimes using flawed analysis and cherry-picked data. Sadly, the major media outlets rely disproportionately on these two journals for science news. I'd suggest you submit a rebuttal along the lines of what you've said in your blog, but the acceptance rate of rebuttals is low in both journals. I've often thought about starting a new journal called "Nature and Science Rebuttals" - I suspect it would be overwhelmed with submissions!Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06760091570152849070noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-52934026339886010212011-06-14T00:35:09.299-07:002011-06-14T00:35:09.299-07:00The Science article does not attempt attribution t...The Science article does not attempt attribution to a CO2 forcing. It only links snow pack reduction to warming (natural or otherwise).<br /><br />Other work solidly pins post-1975 warming on CO2, far beyond any reasonable doubt.<br /><br />So, I don't see why the complaint about a snow pack smoking gun for CO2.<br /><br />And please don't cite Christy.Ruthlesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02677203190698094216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-66903955236703100832011-06-13T22:13:48.960-07:002011-06-13T22:13:48.960-07:00Well done. Send the link to the publishers.
You...Well done. Send the link to the publishers. <br /><br />You say not to aid the "skeptics who are just looking to pounce on excessive claims." You are, however, a wonderful example of an intelligent, empirical skeptic (when in scientific inquiry did this become a negative term?!), and you have systematically shredded a set of excessive claims.<br /><br />You may not consider yourself one of the skeptical. But you are-- (properly) skeptical. One need not be a "denier" to reject the hysteria and authoritarian prescriptions that come with it. Thanks!DJLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01523294182433439251noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-61758871721622877882011-06-13T21:58:36.975-07:002011-06-13T21:58:36.975-07:00The question that really needs to be asked is how ...The question that really needs to be asked is how is the snowpack changing at different altitudes because the average snow level might be rising, but you might get more extreme snow events above that snow level which would lead to a constant or increasing snow pack above the snow level. Once the average snow level gets high enough we will really see the snow pack drop off.weatherloverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08837264200312577875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-45110295383283970972011-06-13T19:04:55.692-07:002011-06-13T19:04:55.692-07:00Global Climate "Weirding" Article:
http:...Global Climate "Weirding" Article:<br />http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/13/extreme-weather-flooding-droughts-fires<br /><br />The extremes of this last year, described in this article, are pretty amazing. Cliff, aren't we just pass a relatively mild multidecade period and now into a not so mild period? This, besides the El Nini/La Nina oscillation could explain all of this. <br /><br />It will be interesting to see if this is just a bad year, or the new norm. At least it gets everyones' attention.<br /><br />KWKenna Wickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02802821050975830973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-1930346293733990262011-06-13T18:51:37.273-07:002011-06-13T18:51:37.273-07:00How does this snowpack data relate to the glaciers...How does this snowpack data relate to the glaciers in these areas? Are the glaciers also increasing or staying the same in size?Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010726138495929820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-8621905453814409772011-06-13T17:05:42.625-07:002011-06-13T17:05:42.625-07:00Cliff, to take on JeffB's point, do you see cl...Cliff, to take on JeffB's point, do you see climate change as a crisis or potential crisis? Seems to me we're headed that way and not doing much about it. <br /><br />Good to know, however, that our snowpacks have not necessarily reached the point of no return (yet).mighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08852029996376698689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-79427321324498793062011-06-13T17:01:53.469-07:002011-06-13T17:01:53.469-07:00It should be straight forward to get some input fr...It should be straight forward to get some input from at least one of the authors. He is a colleague of yours at UW.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13742905742181959851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-87223058720425807432011-06-13T15:45:55.254-07:002011-06-13T15:45:55.254-07:00Cliff - Thanks for being a voice of reason, and pr...Cliff - Thanks for being a voice of reason, and providing actual numerical data and your perspectives.<br /><br />Since the alarmists do not have conclusive science on their side, what is the motivation for their outlandish claims and predictions?<br /><br />Why have we let a scientific debate turn into a political one?<br /><br />How we can wrestle the microphone away from the discredited alarmists, and put real scientists like you at the forefront?Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04468977325422224832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-6490042256652060392011-06-13T15:22:36.565-07:002011-06-13T15:22:36.565-07:00Amen. The problem with the Alarmists is one of m...Amen. The problem with the Alarmists is one of magnitude. There has been warming, and there are no doubt human actions that have a multitude of effects. But there is zero crisis. Crisis is entirely dependent on magnitude. If I tell you that ocean levels are rising at 1 mm per year, it is no crisis. You won't live to see any change, and mankind can certainly adapt reasonably to that rise over time. Even if I tell you the oceans rise at 1 mm per day, you've got time to take appropriate action to save all lives and to even save a lot of property. Alarmists are telling us that we need to drastically change our entire economies over very slight changes in climate, and little understood future outcomes. No sensible person buys this nonsense. A question for those who have lived their entire lives in Puget Sound. Can you tell that there has been any appreciable change in sea level at say Alki Beach over you entire life? Enough said.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02059221822159483655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-87580240659898539862011-06-13T13:32:49.551-07:002011-06-13T13:32:49.551-07:00Cliff,
Do you have a blog that covers the science...Cliff,<br /><br />Do you have a blog that covers the science of global warming? I would be interested to read such a thing, because nothing that I have gleaned from mainstream media is at all convincing. And Al Gore's movie was a joke: classic case of data garbage-in, garbage-out.Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17670895580308520171noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-25313461095422628292011-06-13T12:26:22.797-07:002011-06-13T12:26:22.797-07:00Given that this blog goes beyond jingoism and soun...Given that this blog goes beyond jingoism and soundbites, I'm sorry to see Gary and 1-in-100's posts.<br /><br />For Gary, I expect Cliff's intention is providing understanding, not presenting only the facts that point one way. How can we move towards an educated public if we self-censor the complexity in science according to our preferred conclusion?<br /><br />1-in-100 insists that either everything or nothing is warming, and at all times. This misconception may naturally arise from arguments in which the complexity has been hidden from the public.<br /><br />Paul's question is very good - Science should have required moderation of the conclusion. Painful though it is to complain about politically expedient claims, you should submit a comment to Science. You already have a suite of figures prepared.John Vidalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09871768524749705799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-40484066848357750622011-06-13T12:09:23.997-07:002011-06-13T12:09:23.997-07:00The Global Warming discussion is a diversion. It ...The Global Warming discussion is a diversion. It takes people away from looking at human unsustainability, population growth, deforestation, ect ect. I don't need graphs or even science at this point to understand change is needed.<br /><br />I need sciences and engineering at all levels to understand solutions.<br /><br />I'm actually very interested in global warming because of this. It is almost impossible to figure out if an article is objective or not. So I guess the global warming skeptics and advocates are working together to divert the really important discussions we as a global society should be having.gerghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05301740724269588485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-9370425766364169952011-06-13T11:37:36.421-07:002011-06-13T11:37:36.421-07:00I think part of the problem is people see these th...I think part of the problem is people see these things in black-and-white terms - warming either has to be anthropogenic or it must be natural variability. But the real world is rarely black and white, which unfortunately causes issues for folks who can't abide shades of gray.<br /><br />The onset of the industrial age occurred while the global mean temperature was already climbing (recovery from the "little ice age"); so some post-1850 warming is definitely natural. Recognizing that fact does not make one a "global warming denier" - it simply means one understands that the world's climate is a complicated system.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-46089364848708910652011-06-13T10:12:17.877-07:002011-06-13T10:12:17.877-07:00Hi Cliff,
Thank you for showing that people can b...Hi Cliff,<br /><br />Thank you for showing that people can be reasonable about global warming and its harms. You can be serious about the problems it will cause without turning into a foaming-at-the-mouth lunatic with every bit of bad news about the environment.Sean Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04617196739240103425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478606652950905956.post-87011755937393108412011-06-13T09:58:19.759-07:002011-06-13T09:58:19.759-07:00Bill McKibben and others that link the big tornado...Bill McKibben and others that link the big tornado outbreaks to global warm are also skating on thin ice....I almost did a blog about that after he was interviewed on KUOWCliff Mass Weather Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13948649423540350788noreply@blogger.com