Warm Weather
 

I enjoyed the temporary Global Warming today. We went out for the last boat ride.... Narragansett Bay. Temp hit 67. Didn't have the Luxury of Winni. :look: NB

Was there a sale on helmets and flack jackets at the local Army surplus today?

I'm assuming you're feelin' brave tonight...

:confused::confused: NB

No good can come of this.....

I too experienced a REGIONAL warming today. Temperatures in CT hit 70 degrees. As far as someone's temporary Global Warming today, that is an assumption that the whole globe was warm today. Reykjavik Weather says 45 degrees F and raining. :laugh:

You are probably right. I was just joking around......tweaking the other side. Not trying to stir something up. :D SMILE....is good. Not enough of that these days. :look: NB

HA HA. Just Joking? Ok, I'll call off the NSA Agents that are surrounding your house right now. Just try to not make any sudden movements near the window you are standing near right now................... Ok, that shot was a warning. Don't move again.... Ok, I know you have to turn the stove off so your oatmeal doesn't burn............... just move slowly towards the kitchen.............:laugh::laugh::laugh:

A whole bunch of trolls....

:D:D:D :laugh:

I don't like to explain a joke but...

Helmets and flack jackets are for protecting you when you're in combat... the snarky comment you made is going to result in some swats back at 'cha in other words...

Or as ITD said.... "nothing good can come of this".... :)

No Joke
 

AW, Don't you get it? The poster's name is NoBozo, so he's no clown, hence no sense of humor.

Just kidding NB.:D Stay innocent.

...shorts & tee shirts
 

Got to the Meredith courts today about 4 o'clock to hit some tennis and who's there; three ladies playing canadian doubles, wearing shorts and tee shirts, like it was the middle of the summer.


Howzabouthat? Must-a-been in the 70's....shorts and tee's on November 9! :)

I'm Tellin Ya....The FACTs are everywhere. That Stinkin Warmin is comin and ya can't deny it. :D I think I read that somewhere. NB ...."The Inocent":


PS: My spell cecker is on the blink. :D

Dear Al, Not So Fast...
 

Global What???

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnal...aspx?id=508767

Locally, the Waterville Valley ski area is scheduled to open Nov 20, as always. They try to open the very short High Country trail, up on top, and almost always are successfull. It probably requires just two nights of below freezing temps at 3500' altitude to get it covered, about a 500' long slope.

...only time will tell?

Thanks for changing the subject FLL...Everyone before your post totally had me lost. :D

Not that I'm complaining...

...but how did the title of this thread get changed from the provocative trollish "Global Warming" to the more appropriate "Warm Weather"?

Now if only the comments in this thread were changed from the trollish "Diss Global Warming...smirk, smirk" to an appreciation of there (finally) being some nice fall weather... even if it is the result of human activity :D:laugh::rolleye2:

So, how is the skiing? Waterville Valley was scheduled to open on Nov 20, which is today. Taking a look back over the last 25 years, the ground in the valley should be white with natural snow cover from Nov 8 to Apr 5.

Not this year; the ground is not even frozen yet, there has been no natural snowfall, no artificial snow-making, and today it is raining heavy with temp 53 degrees.

Will the ski areas be open for Thanksgiving, Nov 26?

Hey, it's been a terrific November for :)utd:):)r tennis!

Meredith and Ashland have terrific outdoor hard surface courts to use for free. Waterville Valley (red clay), Center Harbor and Holderness School courts are closed. Does Laconia have any courts?
......

Just checked www.waterville.com and opening day is now scheduled for Friday December 4. No Thanksgiving skiing at WV! Has that ever happened before? And, the prices for the already incredibly expensive Threedom Pass is scheduled to go up on December 1. Rots-o-ruck selling higher-priced ski passes while the area is closed!

On the brite side: Waterville Valley has a new & great look'n new entrance sign proclaming it to be the HOME of FREE STYLE SKIING with a full color sign graphic of Wayne Wong doing an inverted aerial manuever...... a very good sign that adds some personality to the drive.

FLL,Waterville has had about 8 -10 inches of snow this year.No,it will not be opening for T-day this year.The new proposed opening day is Dec 4.

Don't believe it unless you are counting 'phantom snow' as reported by people promoting a snow related business. For one day in early November, WV had less than one inch on the ground. Not enough to need a snow scraper......the windshield wipers got it clear.

I saw it for myself.In October people were hiking up and skiing in 5 inches.

...ok....so it snowed in October....today is November 23, the day JFK was shot, and there is no natural snow and no artificial ski snow anywhere in the Valley; no snow on the summits, no white reflections from the various water streams and no snow, no where.

There is a small pile of white chopped ice left by the Zamboni, dumped out last night, out behind the ice arena. So, if anyone wants that, it is available for the taking, probably.

Almost always, over the past 20 years, the Valley floor is white with natural snow from November 8 to April 5.

This November has been excellent for golf and outdoor tennis.........thankyou very much.

I'm getting rather worried about the mild temps up there. I remember ice forming around Thanksgiving years ago. It needs to get cold fast or I'll be ice fishing from a boat on derby weekend :(

Still Early
 

No need to worry yet, HomeWood. I checked my Ice-In Watch photos from last year and on 12/28/08 the lake was still open water, and Ice-In was not declared until 1/9/09. So, we still have quite a bit of time for the lake to freeze and be safe for the fishing derby.

My unscientific watch over the past 5-10 years shows we rarely have ice before New Years, but usually close thereafter.

Just look at all that white stuff. The mountains have some new snow cover up about 3000' and the ski area is tring to make snow. It looks more like gray spray water than white powdered ice that's sprizt'n out the snow guns, up at 3500". Estimated temp up top...maybe 32.

By the color of the green grass,the ground hasn't frozen yet.

Will it be open on Friday.....stay tuned?

What a warm November, it has been! Seeing three tennis playing Meredith women, all about sixty years age, dressed in shorts and tee shirts back on November 11, Veteran's Day, was a little unusual for a November 11 day! November is a cold month.....not in 2009....no way!

water temp now about 5-6 degrees higher than last year. Unless we get a very deep freeze could be January before lake fully freezes over

I agree. It is usually January before the lake is all frozen over. The broads really take a long time. I would even say the second or third week is the most usual time.

....roar!
 

Them noisy snowguns have been blasting all night up on Waterville Valley's high country area, up at the top, so it looks like a December 4 opening will be happening. Not sure if Dec 4 is Friday or Saturday?

The big question for Dec 4......will it be tennis....or will it be skiing......good grief.....what to do? Being unemployed can have its' good side...:rolleye1:

Mother Nature seems to always be on track, plus or minus 2-3 weeks.

The small fire pond at the end of my road was skimmed over with ice this morning for the first time. Usually happens mid-Novemberish. So, it's coming...just a bit delayed.

At least 2000 ft. I hiked and skied Cannon on Sunday. We had 12 inches at the base which is at 2000 ft elevation.

At Waterville the snow was showing white at about 3000'. No idea of the depth.....probably a slushy inch or two, Probably, the Franconia-Bethlehem area is colder than Waterville, North of the notch gets some different weather moves sometimes.

Waterville is out of their mind if they think they are worth $67.00. After New Years, Mondays and Fridays are twofer days.....maybe before New Years depending on the ski biz this year.

Gunstock has something like a $330 season pass. Any Gunstock deals for Belknap County taxpayers who pay all the highfalluton county salaries, perks and pensions for every retired sheriff & others for the last 40 years?

...monster rain storm
 

Last night's rain had to be the biggest rainfall since probably August or July. It rained a whole lot, heavy, and all night long. The temp is 48. Cannot see the High Country snow-making area, up on top, due to heavy clouds, plus the rain continues to fall but not so heavy now.

Will Watervlle Valley skiing open tomorrow, Dec 4, as announced, or will it get moved back again? As always, only time will tell?

The ground up at 3000' to 4000' elevation may not be frozen, or this rain could have thawed it out. Probably, the ground has to be frozen first for skiable snow to be groomed and skied.

The WV snow phone 603-236-4144 still says that opening day will be November 21 so draw your own conclusion?

I put the boat away too early, 69 degrees and sunny today in Southboro, MA

It might be better for you to pay for the ski pass "you use" to help keep taxes down for all of us. I know how much you dislike taxes. Us too.:)

Dec 4 WV opening day
 

Despite yesterday's huge rain washout, WV High Country will be open today, 236-4144. Two "trails" up there are look'n washed-out white and open for 29 dollars. Skiing for the hard-core faithfull believers, definately! :):):)


Yesterday's Dec 3 LaDaSun has a short, last page AP story: "Dartmouth study says ski areas exaggerate snowfall"

"...two Dartmouth College professors say ski areas across the country exaggerate snowfall totals."

"...the greatest discrepancies occur on the weekend.":):):)

Warm Nov 2009 AND .............
 

Very wet spring and into summer 2009.

Get Them Ski's Waxed, "@ :) Q"...
 

Today, folks in Houston TX woke up to the earliest snow ever! :) :)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34274883/ns/weather/

Warm Weather indeed! (or back to the original title of this thread: Global Warming")
 

Nonewithstanding the recent (very late) cooler change in temperature...

This last decade is the warmest in historical times
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8400905.stm

and the CO2 level is higher than its been in 600,000+ years.

Perhaps that's why the EPA recently (finally) recognized greenhouse gases as a hazard needing regulation:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/sc...gy-environment

methinks ITD was right when he said "No good can come of this....." about the start of this thread..... Reality has a way of dampening the attempted humor of people who deny global warming

They cooked the data Shed, they lied, then threw out the original data, kept only the cooked data. They colluded, ignored contradicting data, schemed to destroy "deniers". They need to be put in jail for this hoax.

Come on, you know that is so wrong. That is a lie being manufactured by the conservative right wing that wants to destroy the earth in its greed, that is not what happened with the stolen emails. Read the real news!

Here we go
 

Here comes the great Right Wing Conspiracy theory.

Hmmmmm
 

Where is the helpful chat in this? Reasonable people can disagree but why these insults from either camp? I need calm in my life.

Have learned some intersting things from this site though.

Keeping this post focused on Lakes Region temps and impact...

Based on the 7-10 day forecast, we should see quickly declining water temps over the next few weeks. Small ponds here in N-central MA have stated keeping their ice skim well into the day, and I expect to start seeing ice on the edges of the larger ones any day now.

With temps well below freezing at night, and barely above freezing (if at all) during the day, the water gives up heat quickly. I'd say we're on track for a normal ice in early January (+/- a few weeks)

(For those who would like to continue to debate the larger global warming/cooling subject, please do so in another forum more appropriate to the topic)

You are trolling Shed, not the place for this discussion. I would be happy if Don decided to remove both my and your comments on this matter.

I'll leave you with my version of a post in another venue:

Evolution - A theory
Quantum Physics - A theory
_________________________

anthropogenic global warming - "the science is settled"

Perhaps you have forgotten this thread was originally (provocatively) titled "Global Warming", and somehow (still don't know how) it got changed. That is why the first few posts up top ("flak jackets", "no good can come of this", etc.) are the way they are. So originally, this thread was about global warming in the Lakes Region.

Plus, I have received PM's saying things like "get out of town". I still find it hard to believe anyone thinks there is any controversy in Global Warming. Its even more amazing that IF there was disagreement about whether it exists, we wouldn't collectively say "let's not exacerbate the problem until we are sure human activity doesn't cause global warming". Instead, the sentiment seems to be "don't even raise questions if we are causing our own extinction because I don't want to have to change my lifestyle". That seems to me to be the crux of the denial of global warming.

I will agree with ITD to exit the thread. As to the suggestion I am trolling - you should see my first comment on this thread ("...A whole bunch of trolls") which acknowledges this thread was originally started as a put-down of global warming (coming off the windmills thread)- the first few posts (after the first) are by people who saw where it was going...

perhaps we can do what was finally imposed on the Speed Limit thread and everyone could make one final statement and then no more. The above is my final statement on this thread. Hopefully no trolls will bring this to another thread.....

No, I did not forget, and I suggest that the topic was changed because many of us would like to have this forum remain focused on topics and exchanges SPECIFIC to the Lakes Region. That is it's stated goal and something that the webmaster (appropriately) monitors closely.

I realize that global warming debates might be argued to apply as the Lakes Region IS part of the globe. But there are many, many other sites where this topic can be debated as much as anyone would like. It's not appropriate here. So we should either have this be a discussion of Lakes Region, local weather, or it should be deleted.

For The Record...
 

Books. Dallas TX got it's first measurable snow 'Ever' last night, with 3" at DFW Airport! A wonderful white Christmas here! :) :) :) :)
Terry

and very slippery roads. Yikes. No sand or salt on these road down here.

Hi Neighbor...
 

Janet,
here in the Metroplex I was amazed at the great job that TX-DOT and the towns did in sanding the trouble areas, bridges, overpasses, and sections of highways on Christmas Eve. The wind was absolutely howling!
I took my sister Doña and brother in law to DFW airport today for a flight to England to visit with family there for New Years.
Although they don't use rock salt here, as the temperature usually rebounds quite rapidly after an event such as this moves through, it was very evident that all of the roads, to & from were well sanded and pretty much back up to speed.

A Very Happy New Year to Y'All,
Terry

Hi trfour
 

Glad you got to DFW ok. The roads here in Plano were not as good. Early Christmas morning couldn't go over 20 miles an hour. I wanted to wait until the sun came up to melt the roads but had 2 little ones waiting for me to arrive so they could see what Santa had brought them. Looks like more precip coming tomorrow.

Happy New Year to you also!

Mother Nature Will Prevail...
 

I am 100% for reducing air pollutants, however of all the studies done over time, ice core and earths crust drilling's, long time studies have shown that when the earth has warmed, it was also followed by an ice age. "I did not make this up".

Now, some of today's scientists, are trying their best to override Mother Nature.

Do Trust in Her!!!!

Experts?; Despite cold Snap, earth still warming.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34735022/ns/weather/

I think that they are looking for a way to blame the next ice age on earth's warming. :)

Terry
__________________

Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. - Bertrand Russell ( 1872-1970)

Good post TR. To add to the argument, Cuba had a low of 29, the lowest temp it's EVER recorded.

More Mistakes Uncovered...
 

Today on MSN; http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34958926...s-environment/

More Mistakes
 

And isn't it interesting that all their "mistakes" were one-way, mistakes that supported their arguement? That adds up to ZERO credibility in my book. Try making those kind of one-way "mistakes" on your tax return and see what the IRS does. :laugh:

What Does Mother Nature Have In Common With...
 

Argue?... NONE.

Invade Her space, Get a Big Slap In The Sn otter! :)

Our very great discoverers, try as they may, want to argue...

Again, one of our very own put this practice into prospective. " Invade Her Space, will bring an Lightening strike, as to a long pine in the forest!... Read it and weep! " The Late, Charles Dickens."


Argue was stricken from my vocabulary at a very young age, and some light will be shed and forthcoming in my blog.

Terry

________________

¿sɹǝʌɹǝs ʍǝu ǝɥʇ ɥʇıʍ op oʇ ƃuıɥʇʎuɐ ǝʌɐɥ sıɥʇ pןnoɔ ˙ʍou ʇsod ı uǝɥʍ ɯǝןqoɹd ɐ ǝʌɐɥ oʇ ɹɐǝddɐ ı



Stay tuned friends...

Nasa's report
 

Here's NASA's analysis that the last decade was the warmest ever. Do we assume they are corrupting the numbers too?

The article explains the cold weather this year in Cuba and North America. Their conclusion, In the past three decades, the GISS surface temperature record shows an upward trend of about 0.36 degrees F (0.2 degrees C) per decade. In total, average global temperatures have increased by about 1.5 degrees F (0.8 degrees C) since 1880.

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010...est_temps.html

GISS <GODDARD Studies Space for Institute>uses publicly available data from three sources to conduct its temperature analysis. The sources are weather data from more than a thousand meteorological stations around the world, satellite observations of sea surface temperatures, and Antarctic research station measurements.

Other research groups also track global temperature trends but use different analysis techniques. The Met Office Hadley Centre in the United Kingdom uses similar input measurements as GISS, for example, but it omits large areas of the Arctic and Antarctic where monitoring stations are sparse.

frozen lake and lots of rain
 

My question is what will happen to the lake with 1-3 inches of rain. I know that the rain/water will sit on top of the lake until it freezes or runs off. What will happen to all of that water comming down from the mountians?
Will it put prressure on the underside of the ice? Will it just run in and them out at the dam?:confused:

It may melt it a little bit, but I'm more worried about street flooding because all the strorm drains are clogged with snow, or will get clogged when snow washes into them!

Interesting Formula...
 

The Dam operators here at Lake Winnipesaukee seem to be, and are very much more intuned to our Lakes happenings. They remain and adjust to.

OH and Ya, they keep ( The Hat On )... They are adjusted to the conditions here, ON THE GROUND......

Now, my wish for some others to listen???? "TEN FOUR!"

trfour,
Terry

So far, the rain has melted ALL the snow on the lake that I can see, and there is a 2" deep pond on top of the foot+ of ice. It is just gray now. The wind is creating waves, pushing the warm water around. After a freeze, it will be safe again where the ice was thick, but there is bound to be new soft spots.

Look, one really can't argue that the climate may be warming. It has changed for eons in both directions. It certainly has warmed since the last ice age when there was ONE MILE of ice on top of Manhattan. The argument is whether it is all due to man-made factors.

Well, yes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...060202698.html

Science has been corrupted by politics. I don't think we can believe any of them anymore.

Boater - I'm confused by your post.... normally you represent the "skeptic" end of the climate change article, but the article you quoted was about how members of the Bush administration tried to suppress the findings of NASA scientists showing that climate change was a real, major, and growing problem.

There was nothing in the article about the science being disreputable, only the government's attempt to silence the scientists was labeled disreputable.

Have you changed sides, are did you not read the article carefully?

My "side" is the open mind side. My point was that NASA does distort the data for political purposes. There are many other accusations out there. Here's another: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnal...aspx?id=518890

Since politics seems to influence scientists we should be wary of their conclusions. ClimateGate showed that many scientists are willing to spin the data to achieve political goals. NASA isn't immune. That's all.

It is pretty warm today and I did drive much more than I usually do over the last week, maybe those guys from the UK didn't have to cook the data after all!

Bring on Global Warming!

Mother Nature's View...
 

And Coming; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

There is no political election that could ever unseat her!

Terry
____________________

I don't really know how to introduce this...I'm embarrassed for all who jumped on the "skeptic bandwagon" because you wanted climate researchers to be wrong, without any evidence that there was anything wrong...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/sc...imate.html?hpw

So much has been written about the "statistical trick", as if "trick" meant doing something deceitful. The "trick" was combining two previously unrelated databases and seeing they complemented one another.

I admit some of the scientists were crude in their contemptuous comments about skeptics. And I understand the pain and rage felt by those who felt contempt directed at them. But that doesn't have anything to do with whether the science was right or wrong, and EVERY peer-reviewed study supports and continues to support the evidence that climate change is caused by human activity and is making things worse.

Thomas Friedman of the NY Times had an interesting piece a month or so ago. His argument: If there was a 1% chance that Al Qaeda terrorists had discovered a new way to get a nuclear bomb, is that 1% chance enough to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. By the way, Dick Cheney, then VP of the US was the one who said that we should treat it that way.

Similarly, if there is a 1% chance that the earth will become uninhabitable by humans due to our affecting the climate, shouldn't we respond (for exactly the same reasons as Cheney gave)? Actually, the % is much higher than 1% that if humans do not make major changes in their behaviors affecting the climate that the ensuing climate change will disasterously affect the economy (and lives) of our grandchildren in a very negative way.

Well, enough of this...lets enjoy the sled dog races.

Oh,... in danger of being cancelled again due to lack of snow, for the 9th time in the last few decades, whereas they ran EVERY year earlier in the century (except for the hiatus around WW2)

Shed, don't be embarrassed for those of us that keep an open mind and have a healthy skepticism. We think those qualities embody true science. We think that science should be a relentless pursuer of the truth instead of a way to validate a political ideology. FACT: The only consensus on AGW is among liberals. I can find lots and lots of qualified scientists who completely disagree with your conclusions. Like the scientists at the University of East Anglia, you seem to be very comfortable ignoring them while only embracing scientists that share your personal beliefs.

Climategate showed that the Peer Review process has been seriously corrupted. When you have like-minded people reviewing each other while skeptics are intentionally shut out the whole process is worthless. Period.

This quote is very revealing. EVERY peer-review supports your position? There is not a single opposing view among these scientists? Give me a break. I can't believe that any scientific hypothesis has ever had EVERY scientist in agreement. The very nature of science is challenging hypothesis. If this quote is true then it proves that the AGW scientists have systematically eliminated any opposition, because it surely exists.

The big problem for the AGW worshipers is that they have consistently lead with lies. Lie #1, the Polar Bears. They are thriving. They are not drowning. Their population is 400% larger than it was 40 years ago. If the earth does warm their population will grow even more. Constantly trying to scare people with images of Polar Bears falling from the sky does not help your case. Lie #2, the ocean levels will rise 20 feet and all coastal cities will be under water. Even the IPCC said the rise would be only 18 inches by the end of the century. The 20 foot figure was either totally made up or the result of some wacky computer model. Lie #3, using images and video from fictional movies during supposedly scientific presentations. This makes many proponents, like Algore, look really silly. Lie #4, much of An Inconvenient Truth.

As I've said before, the big problem with all this is the liberal solution: TAX, TAX, TAX. Even the EPA admits that Cap & Trade will do little to help the environment. It's only goal is a massive transfer of wealth. We'll heavily tax our already failing businesses and lose countless jobs (millions?) while emerging economies like China will do nothing that would slow down their economic expansion. They'll be laughing at us while we destroy what's left of our economy. So, I ask you Shed, do you support Cap & Trade as a solution?

Shed, you seem very determined to get your point accross and that is fine, I am not here to attack your stance on this matter.

But, constantly standing up and puffing out your chest, is not becoming.

Sooo, being that humans are the root cause of the issue, I am making the assumption that you are doing something about it, you have not said that directly, but I will assume that you are doing more than talking and telling.

Have you given up your car, fuel source for heating your home and water, stopped using electricity, stopped using anything made of plastic, metal, do not buy jewlery, no clothing, manufactered bodycare products, are you living under the stars (no blankets, thats cheating). Techinically anything since the beginning of man, can be directly attributed to the theory, think long and hard about that.

Before you jump all over me, I do in fact have the opinion that climate change is an issue, but you are not doing anyone any favors by acting the way you do about this subject. And no, I have not given up any of the items above. Simply state your information and allow folks to form their own opinions. I don't know if you have kids, but if you do, think about what it is like to get your child to eat a food that they do not want to try, you cannot cram it down their throats and expect them to start liking it.

The extremes in seasonal changes are very evident, but the one thing you seem to be missing is that most of the folks that think climate change is not true, are directly thinking that it means that New Hampshire is going to have North Carolina weather tomorrow, that is a minor side effect, the major side effect is weather not appearing "normal". (if you do not believe me, look back on all the threads related to this issue, then look at current comments regarding Global Warming (not just this site but anywhere), they are all related in that they talk of temperature, that is why it is not called Global Warming anymore, folks took it to be a literal statement) Folks are not looking at the Bi-polar effect of our weather as an issue related to Climate Change, they scratch theirs heads and just wonder why its happening, lots of snow one year, hardly any the next, lots of rain and no sun in the summer, then really hot temps in the fall, snow in Washington, Dallas, Disney and a multitude of other weather pattern changes that have gone way past normal in the last 5 years alone.

Climate change is very real and while it's rate is being affected by the side effects of human life, it is only going to be worst if we continue to try and mess with the way the earths climate changes. We will never reverse the human affect on the earth, even stopping everything tomorrow will not change anything in our families-families lifetimes.

Even though I stated my opinion above, I still listen to both sides. I still look at this issue with both eyes open and I suggest you do the same, otherwise you start argueing the wrong points and everyone stops listening.

Plus, its not worth getting all worked up about, life as we know it ends in 2 years anyway, so eat, drink and be merry, anything else will give you an ulser. :)

The Dog Ate my Homework...
 

The below quote was written before ClimateGate.

"Steve M" is Steve McIntyre, a climate scientist who found the hidden data (archived in Russia) and challenged Mann, saying data was tossed that didn't fit the theory—endangering future government grants.

The many comments above came out in September of 2009.

Meanwhile, hackers exposed Climatologists' contemptuous 61Mb of e-mails—immediately termed "ClimateGate". In October, the BBC was presented with all of the hacked data for disclosure to the public; however, BBC merely sat on the information. (As has most of the US media).

Just weeks before the Copenhagen Conference, "ClimateGate" was disclosed world-wide on the Internet, assuring the failed conference there.

One paragraph from that article:

Can someone explain how Mann was cleared of the charge of hiding data? :confused:

A Brit ex-pat (at the same source as above) has stated my own view:

BTW: "ClimateGate" released this e-mailed tidbit early-on, which intended to hide a seven-year decline (!) in world temperatures. (Something that eerily conforms to the much-damper and cooler temps around Lake Winnipesaukee's post-2002 seasons).

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/1...iles-released/

Sound like a Climate Scientist to you? :eek:

OK so you're using the fact that NH has no snow as an argument to support Global Warming? Ummmmm ok, sooooo explain the 3 feet of snow in Washington DC a few hundred miles south of us? Curious?

I do believe that folks in the UK would argue with your conclusions Shed.

Here is some interesting reading for you:

http://www.fairinvestment.co.uk/News...-18470402.html

Folks in India might take issue as well:

http://www.telegraphindia.com/110012...y_12041751.jsp

Another one close to home

http://www.katu.com/blogs/weather/81281412.html

2012: The End...
 

If you meant all life is to end in the year 2012—on the rock carving known as the "Mayan Calendar", an explanation has been produced recently... :cool:

http://bitsandpieces.us/wp-content/u...20calendar.jpg

I was going to ask the same thing.

Global Warming?
 

Global warming??? how come my thermomenter hasent got over 31 deg. In a month? Where is your global warming now??


:D

trivia
 

Out of all the atmospheric gases, what is the most abundant "green house gas"? I will give you a hint, #1 is nitrgen @ 78.08% and #2 is oxigen @ 20.95%, what is the next gas and it is the reason the earth retains heat and it makes up the vast majority of the remaining, .07%

(the percentage do vary depending on where you are in the globe)

?
 

Bueller???

Well now I thought there had to be a good explanation.:D

APS got it but for anyone else, my tongue was pressed firmly in cheek on that one.

Just to answer Lie#2, you are correct about everything except that the 20 foot number comes from the volume of water held in current ice caps and other forms of ice that is currently over land only, the ice over water does not count as it displaces water currently. I just watched a program on that very subject this weekend. It will take thousands of years for the seas to rise to those levels. Anyway, I am seeing my current property coming closer and closer to being a water front home.:coolsm:

Other than that, very good information and I agree with your stance on those items. I hate to see those polar bear commercials, showing the bear and cub on a piece of ice that is floating away and they have to swim. Makes you wonder if overall folks do not know, that sea ice melts every year and that scene actually is a normal occurance.

Global Climate Change??
 

How's that Global Climate Change working out for the Mid-Atlantic states!:rolleye2:

Since you asked... it's what climate change theory predicts.

"Skeptics of global warming are using the record-setting snows to mock those who warn of dangerous human-driven climate change — this looks more like global cooling, they taunt.

Most climate scientists respond that the ferocious storms are consistent with forecasts that a heating planet will produce more frequent and more intense weather events.

...Jeff Masters, a meteorologist who writes on the Weather Underground blog, said that the recent snows do not, by themselves, demonstrate anything about the long-term trajectory of the planet. Climate is, by definition, a measure of decades and centuries, not months or years.

But Dr. Masters also said that government and academic studies had consistently predicted an increasing frequency of just these kinds of record-setting storms, because warmer air carries more moisture." (from NYTimes article)

Global warming leads to warmer temperatures so more moisture in air, which leads to larger storms.

Somehow people get the idea that global warming is only true if it never gets below 50°...

No, global warming is a complex global phenomenon, caused by human activity, which leads to a variety of "surprising" (to many) results, including more severest storms (including blizzards)

However, no single weather event - rather it be a snowstorm in the mid-Atlantic, or a 80° day in northern Norway for the first time in a lifetime, is in itself proof or disproof of a theory. "Both climate-change contrarians and climate-change scientists agree that no single weather event can be blamed on climate change."

Its the preponderance of events, like arctic ice melting, or the fact that 3 of the world's warmest years have occurred in the last decade, or that the climate of New England is becoming more temperate and the seasons longer, that point to global warming. And its a second bit of evidence (referred to as a trick by a climate researcher and thus leading to accusations of lying when he meant trick to mean "putting two different data sets together") that connects human activity to climate change - for example - rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Read more on the debate here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/sc...ml?ref=science

They cooked the data, more examples of malfeasance come out every day. "More intense storms", more intense than what? Don't you find it a little suspicious that no matter what the event it points to global warming????? Mild winter = global warming, cold winter = global warming, too little snow = global warming, too much snow = global warming, cool summer = global warming, warm summer = global warming..............

You are so right, ITD. Whatever it is, it is caused by global warming. They can twist it every way.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/COXANDFORKUM.jpg


I hope I haven't offended the hardcore folks. But I would like to offer an option other than the NY Times for climate change data. I was a student of meteorology and climatology and I believe our global climate patterns are controled by two things, the sun and the ocean. We couldn't change either one if we wanted. One of my professors, Joseph D'Aleo who now currently operates ICECAP, a group of world class scientists and meteorologists (http://icecap.us) is a great resource on this subject. ICECAP sorts out on a daily basis the truth and distortions about this topic. A great resource for anyone interested in climate change facts. The best thing is Joe D'Aleo isn't from New York or Washington, he lives here in NH. So enjoy the weather it's the only weather you got.

Yet Another Record Shattering Snow Event...
 

Winter 2010 at DFW Airport, Dallas TX. At over 8" on the ground, and the winter storm warning in effect with whiteout conditions for another 8 hours, today has been the snowiest calender day in History here!

I had been looking forward to flying up there to do some more snowmobiling. If this keeps up I may have to pick up my sled and ride it back down here! :look: :)

Two sides in warming debate seize on storms to bolster arguments.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35343948...ew_york_times/

I was wondering the other day whether we have a method of tracking the temperature of the sun. Anybody besides Shedwannabe know if this data exists? I don't want the numbers to get "fudged"... :emb:

Sun Spots
 

I had heard a while back that the earth's temperature is based on the amount of sun spots on the sun at a certain time. Can't remember if the more sun spots the cooler the earth and vice versa for the fewr sun spots.

I don't think that the so called scientists that predicted stronger more intense storms were talking about the most snow fall in the mid-atlantic since the late 1800's. More snow there means colder here in NH as the "cold" air is pushing all these "stronger more intense" storms to our south.
Our temperatures in NH have been below normal for most of December and January. I guess this all has to do with global warming. :rolleye2:

Also, I don't consider the NY Times as the most reliable source for anything political. :laugh:

Amazing isn't it? Warmer weather trends mean man-made global warming. Cold weather with ALL TIME record snows in the snow also translate to man-made global warming. The ferocious hurricanes that were supposed to increase the last 3 years, forecasted by non other than the author of An Inconvienant Truth Al Gore, have done just the opposite. The people are not stupid about this crap being rammed down their throats from the liberal left and results are showing up everyway in the the recent elections. I see Mr Kennedy has just called it career in RI so he won't have to suffer the same fate. Time for the rest of the country to gets its head out of the snow drifts. :laugh:

Where have all the winters gone?
Long time passing
Where have all the winters gone?
Long time ago
Where have all the winters gone?
People pretended nothing's changed
When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Ah, more irrefutable "settled" science.

Ya, And Then Some...
 

Just remember ITD, Ya heard it All here First! :laugh:

Terry
___________________

Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. - Bertrand Russell ( 1872-1970)

<!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->

'Waking up to The News—on Monday?
 

In England, they just woke up to it today.

Al Gore, Michael Moore, and other "Global-Warmers" quoted the eminent Climatologist, Professor Phil Jones. A British newspaper quotes some of Professor Jones' admissions from this weekend:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...organised.html

:eek: The dog DID eat the homework! :laugh:

This important development should resonate in US media as we speak.

:rolleye1:

BUT.. there's the problem. These people tell the naysayers of global warming say that the colder weather and bigger snowstorms can not be considered as evidence for our case. HOWEVER, they use them to make their case telling us colder winters and larger snowstorms are the RESULT of global warming?
Oh please it is such nonsense. Look do I believe that the climate is changing, YES! Do I believe that man is the sole root cause NO! Unfortunately if you look at the big picture and I mean the huge picture over thousands and thousands of years the data supports this trend. Global Warming Scientist will only allow anyone to look at the data through their eyes. "Peer Review" you say ha ha ha, what peer? The Peer receiving millions of dollars in grant money as well?
Do I believe we need to conserve energy and be a bit more green YES YES YES! I want my children to have clean cheap energy. I just don't like the tsk tsk scientists LYING to us in order to guilt us all into driving a Prius (nice brakes by the way). Oh by the way this whole effort has been costing us billions all along the way.
Save it Washington, tell the truth, tell us what we already know.

Global Climate Change??
 

i think the term "Global Climate Change" is a term that was come with because they the scientists got caught cooking the books for "Global Warming". Now they use this loose term of "Global Climate change" to prove their point like the big snow storms in the mi-atlantic. Of course, these would not be occuring if it were not for "Global Climate Change"! :emb:

The best part of it all is that the liberal looneys on "The View" blame Global Climate Change on the earthquake that occured in Haiti and volcanic eruptions around the world. Can't remember which one of them said it, but Howie Carr was playing the quote all day on the radio last week. Yeah, Global Climate change has a lot to do with earthquakes! :emb: Get a brain.

Interesting reaction to Thomas Friedman's article on "Global Weirding" in today's NY Times. He lays out an argument for getting climate scientists together and coming up with a clear joint statement on what is know about climate change (he admits that calling it global warming sets of the denialists whenever a snowstorm happens). His belief, as expressed in the article, is that if people just looked at the undisputed facts (of which there are many) they would realize that deniers are motivated to attack global climate change as unproved in order to protect their economic interests, and that the denial has nothing to do with science.

So people started commenting on the NY Times article. One of the comments (which attracted lots of recommendations) was to the effect that "Friedman - you are crazy to think that people will listen to reason - after all, a majority of Americans think (wrongly) that Saddam Hussien was involved in the 9/11 attacks, and 75% of Republicans believe Obama isn't American." While I don't know if her percentages are right, it certainly is true that many people hold onto patently false beliefs... for reasons I cannot comprehend. as another commenter notes, a large percentage of people don't even believe in evolution (which even the Catholic Church accepts as accurate)

A sample comment: "Sorry Tom, the fact of this matter are that no argument, no evidence, no persuasion will convince the folks tilted against the climate change (Global Warming) issue. They issue ridiculous statements and seemingly logical arguments against this issue and no evidence, no statement by experts will dislodge their stance. Those opposed to taking any action to moderate climate change are similar in mindset to the Creationist claiming fossils were placed on earth by the Devil to confuse mankind. This is a hopeless situation and as long as the United States is ruled by politicians willing to promulgate these arguments, to confuse voters, in support of their corporate bosses, we are lost."

So it seems we go down our separate paths - those who look at science - a process based on evidence, a self-correcting process, and those who look elsewhere - though for the life of me I cannot understand where they look, as it seems part denial of reality, part not wanting to face anything uncomfortable, and part not wanting to give up privilege that makes others pay for our extravagantly wasteful lifestyle.

When I first posted on Winnipesaukee.com I did not believe there were people who would admit to being climate deniers - those who would not accept the scientific evidence but instead refer to anecdotes (like "DC got a lot of snow - that means no global warming") or industry speaking pints that are not based on real evidence. I have learned a lot. I'm still amazed that people admit to rejecting science - its a sad comment on our country when science is denied and financial interests prevail. I have heard some posters say the issue of climate change/global warming is not settled science, and I appreciate skepticism (which is different than the more common extremist views regularly voiced here), but skepticism has to at least address the vast preponderance of evidence supporting global warming theories, and do something other than scream "its cold right here right now" to disprove global warming.

And its funny I am just as sad for you that you swallow every bit of "Science" jammed down your throat and take it as fact. You look down at everyone else who does not share your view. Global Warming is not a fact! No matter how many times you say it to yourself it just does not make it any more true. Part of being a learner, and educated person is to read and react to what you see and hear. You, unfortunately read and accept. There are literally THOUSANDS of contradictions in the Global Warming Science. There are thousands of scientists who dispute it. I am just as scared that there are people like you out there that follow the herd and file in line behind flawed science and no matter what refuse to question the authority on its findings. As I said before I believe in Climate Change. I believe these things to be cyclical over billions of years. I believe Dinosaurs probably emitted as much methane gas to cause climate change billions of years ago. I believe one volcano can have a profound affect on the environment. I believe that pollution is a problem. I just don't subscribe to the alarmist mentality that you so willingly accept, and blindly might I add. It is our right to question the science especially when the motivation lies heavily on the supporters of said theories, contrary to what you think. Billions in grant money is at stake here.
The saddest part is that once the government took a stake in this we all lost. There are lies on both sides of the issue that is for sure.

Shed, You turn your nose down and act all superior and that is fine but you are merely swallowing a political agenda yourself. Do not try and hide behind the Scientists and Peer Reviews. As we have seen they are on shaky ground and we are well within our rights to question them. You are not better than us. I am saddened by your opinion that you think you are.

Here is one of thousands of Scientists:
Dr. John Christy, professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Alabama at Huntsville said: "I remember as a college student at the first Earth Day being told it was a certainty that by the year 2000, the world would be starving and out of energy. Such doomsday prophecies grabbed headlines, but have proven to be completely false." "Similar pronouncements today about catastrophes due to human-induced climate change," he continued, "sound all too familiar and all too exaggerated to me as someone who actually produces and analyzes climate information."

The media, of course, like the exaggerated claims. Most are based on computer models that purport to predict future climates. But computer models are lousy at predicting climate because water vapor and cloud effects cause changes that computers fail to predict. In the mid-1970s, computer models told us we should prepare for global cooling.

Scientists tell reporters that computer models should "be viewed with great skepticism." Well, why aren't they?

The fundamentalist doom mongers also ignore scientists who say the effects of global warming may be benign. Harvard astrophysicist Sallie Baliunas said added CO2 in the atmosphere may actually benefit the world because more CO2 helps plants grow. Warmer winters would give farmers a longer harvest season, and might end the droughts in the Sahara Desert.

Why don't we hear about this part of the global warming argument? "It's the money!" said Dr. Baliunas. "Twenty-five billion dollars in government funding has been spent since 1990 to research global warming. If scientists and researchers were coming out releasing reports that global warming has little to do with man, and most to do with just how the planet works, there wouldn't be as much money to study it."

Hazelnut, that is a very well written response.

The way Shed's information is presented sounds similar to others who have posted about other subjects (I do not think they are related), but they sure want to tell you how it is, when discussion is reduced to barking back and forth, all the true information is lost.

Keeping an open mind on this subject could do both sides a favor.

jMen,

I have hundreds and hundreds of articles from well respected scientists, and reviews that raise questions on the issue.

My stance is one of open mindedness. I believe things should be greener. I believe in recycling and energy efficient vehicles. I believe we owe it to our children to hand them a cleaner planet than the one we inherited. I also believe we have made and are making great strides in that direction.

What I do not believe in is Global Warming as a scare tactic disguised as science. It is a political agenda end of story no argument. What is sad is people are led to this level of hysteria over global climate change by the agenda of these scientists who are sucking billions and billions of dollars out of the economy.

I read both sides, listen to both sides and make educated choices. Sadly, for Shed, I am not running out to get my Prius next weekend. However, once the hybrid or total electric vehicle becomes commonplace, efficient and affordable I'll be first in line. I lay out my recycling bin every week, I try to do my part. But NOT because I am scared of some cooked up global warming theory.