Colorado snowpack is significantly below average so far

10 Jan 2012 09:47 #31 by AspenValley
All it takes is one or two really good spring storms to bring the snowfall totals up. We hear every single year at this time that the snowpack is below average. If we don't see some spring storms, THEN I'll worry about this year's potential for drought/fire.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Jan 2012 10:44 #32 by FredHayek

AspenValley wrote: All it takes is one or two really good spring storms to bring the snowfall totals up. We hear every single year at this time that the snowpack is below average. If we don't see some spring storms, THEN I'll worry about this year's potential for drought/fire.


And sometimes a wet spring creates more fuel for fire, as the long grass dries out in the summer.

I just hope the fire season is very dull in 2012.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Jan 2012 17:05 #33 by ScienceChic

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: And from the "man behind the curtain" department... another grand pronouncement from the University of East Anglia...

Climate expert Dr David Viner, who until recently worked at Britain’s world-renowned Climatic Research Unit at the 'famed' University of East Anglia, in 2000 in the Independent made the expert prediction that snow would soon become a “rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.

When asked again a few days ago if he still stuck by his prediction he said Yes". ‘We’ve had three weeks of relatively cold weather, and that doesn’t change anything. ‘This winter is just a little cooler than average, and I still think that snow will become an increasingly rare event.’

http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/forum ... -snow.html


And anyone with a little Google-fu can find the longer and more detailed article by Dr. David Viner... (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain)

I cite you scientific evidence, and you come back with a blog and newspaper article about one scientist's opinion - do you see why you're not convincing me at all? BTW, this guy is no longer with East Anglia, so this is not another "grand pronouncement from the University of East Anglia" as this came from but one scientist from there and was not an official press release or announcement from the school. But given your past history, I understand your hang-up with anyone associated with them, despite the fact that they've been cleared by more investigations than a murderer is even granted.

So I did do a Google search, as you suggested, and to my surprise I found that the article that claims that he "stands by his statements" 10 years later is none other than the dailymail's flat-out wrong The mini ice age starts here article that I debunked already . Considering how much they lied about the research they reported on, I'd say that their claim of Viner "standing by his statements" is too unreliable to believe. Regardless, he is one scientist, not the be-all, end-all authority on what will happen in the future.

But if you'd like to convince me otherwise that global warming is a myth, please bring some credible scientific data, I'd be happy to look it over!

(Sorry PF, to have participated in hijacking your thread into global warming, but they are related...) :)

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Jan 2012 17:29 #34 by Photo-fish

lionshead2010 wrote: So a couple of take aways here I see whether we are talking about climate or weather.

1. The aspen tree die off we see may be due to drought and not pocket gophers so no need to poison the little critters.

2. If we don't get good late winter and spring rains and snows then plan on an early fire season. Do your mitigation in March instead of April.

3. Just because your HOA didn't have to plow much snow this year doesn't mean you won't need the money next year so stop the legal fights over stupid sh-t and save up for plowing next year.

4. If wells are already struggling at some homesteads then maybe we don't need hundreds of new homes sucking from the ground at Shaffers Crossing and Pine Junction.

Good points :like:

I will add:
5. If you are on a public water system, you can have fees added to your bill if you are caught irrigating during water restrictions. (They don't neccessarily have to catch you with a hose in your hand. That device on your water meter keeps record of use at every 20 minute interval and they can monitor it just by driving past your house at any time.) That goes for HOA irrigation accounts, golf courses and rec. district ball fields.

´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`´¯`•...¸><((((º>´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•.´¯`•...¸><((((º>

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 Jan 2012 07:27 #35 by FredHayek
88 inches in Anchorage so far this year. Would you prefer that? Actually a big dump like that would be fun for awhile.

I was surprised to see that Anchorage only averages 30 inches of snow a year. It must be true, on a clear day you can see Alaska from Anchorage.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 Jan 2012 08:00 #36 by Reverend Revelant

Science Chic wrote: [snip]
So I did do a Google search, as you suggested, and to my surprise I found that the article that claims that he "stands by his statements" 10 years later is none other than the dailymail's flat-out wrong The mini ice age starts here article that I debunked already. Considering how much they lied about the research they reported on, I'd say that their claim of Viner "standing by his statements" is too unreliable to believe. Regardless, he is one scientist, not the be-all, end-all authority on what will happen in the future.
[snip]


Now he's just one scientist. Ok... who is this "one" scientist? Well he was a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia. He's one of the people that has been responsible for the data sets produced by the CRU. And what is he doing now? "Dr David Viner now has a plum job, funded by you and me, running a £10 million scheme at the British Council to raise awareness of global warming among young people abroad." I love how your "scientist" run away from your heros when they fall flat on their faces... and then you try to minimize their contributions to the science. You're a quaint littel bunch of sharks... aren't you?

Tap dance 101. Give me another song and dance.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/james ... -de-neige/

Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 Jan 2012 12:07 #37 by ScienceChic
No. You give me some credible scientific data that global warming isn't happening first, you've owed me for a long time now. lol I will not accept your deflection and avoidance of the real issue at hand by throwing out one opinion written in a newspaper article 12 years ago.

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 Jan 2012 12:12 #38 by Reverend Revelant

Science Chic wrote: No. You give me some credible scientific data that global warming isn't happening first, you've owed me for a long time now. lol I will not accept your deflection and avoidance of the real issue at hand by throwing out one opinion written in a newspaper article 12 years ago.


Nope... you keep moving the target. AGW is what you want me to discuss. Right?

Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 Jan 2012 12:15 #39 by ScienceChic
Nope, I have always asked for credible scientific data showing that global warming isn't happening to convince me otherwise.
http://www.pinecam.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... sc&start=0

Call it anthropogenic global warming, or just global warming, doesn't matter: right now they're both the same thing whether you accept it or not.

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

13 Jan 2012 14:04 #40 by Reverend Revelant

Science Chic wrote: Nope, I have always asked for credible scientific data showing that global warming isn't happening to convince me otherwise.
http://www.pinecam.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... sc&start=0

Call it anthropogenic global warming, or just global warming, doesn't matter: right now they're both the same thing whether you accept it or not.


Oh come on Science Chic... you're better than that... it does matter... now your going to ignore the nuance because it doesn't fit your notions. They are not the same and you know it. AGW indicates " human-induced", where as global warming is a much broader term that could be as simple as natural geophysical cycles. Like I said, you're moving the target. The targets been moved at least three times. First it was AGW, then global warming and now climate change. As the theories break down, scientist attempt to lay a wider and wider net in hopes of catching some little bit of the truth.

Dishonest.

Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.161 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+