When the mercury soars it’s a heat “wave” or heat “dome.” When it plunges it’s a cold “snap”. As in, a temporary blip, nothing to see, doesn’t mean a thing. Such as Scientific American: “This week’s cold snap across the U.S. will be one of ‘the most impressive Arctic outbreaks of this century,’ one climate scientist says”. And the one in Texas in February 2021? Also a “snap”. And “More daily weather records fall on Vancouver Island amid cold snap”. But after a week it sure feels like a cold dome.
To give them credit, partial anyway, they also say: “Scientists are still trying to pin down precisely what causes these disruptions” and quote “Kristina Dahl, a climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists”, that:
“It’s a very active area of research and something that scientists are passionately debating and trying to figure out at the moment. It’s definitely not settled science.”
And then go right back to the guy they started with who says otherwise:
“Still, many experts believe climate change likely plays a role – and Cohen goes even further: he contends that climate change in the Arctic is directly disrupting the polar vortex…. ‘It seems very counterintuitive and surprising that a warmer planet can actually increase your odds of experiencing severe winter weather events – but that’s what our research has shown,’ Cohen says.”
But computers to the rescue:
“Megan Kirchmeier-Young is a research scientist with Environment and Climate Change Canada who uses climate models to figure out whether certain extreme weather events can be linked to climate change.”
And:
“‘In general, cold extremes are becoming less frequent,’ she said. Not only that, but the temperatures during cold snaps are becoming warmer.”
Hey. Didn’t you say we Canadians just set a bunch of records for cold rather than having warmer temperatures in our cold “snap”? But it’s far worse to dismiss mere cold records as mere factual evidence so pay it no mind:
“In fact, the record temperatures we saw in recent weeks would ‘most likely’ have been even colder without climate change.”
How do you know? Because it’s getting warmer. And how do you know it’s getting warmer? Because the cold snap would have been snappier otherwise.
That argument is frustratingly circular. So, care to help us out by making a prediction about future reality we can actually test? Uh, that’d be not:
“‘As we continue warming, it is less likely that we will be breaking cold records,’ she added, ‘but we may.’”
Fortunately since all evidence confirms the theory, it doesn’t matter anyway. The science remains settled. Whatever happens, warming explains it, and moreover whatever happens, it proves the planet is warming. Even cold weather. AP, for instance, assures us that:
“Much of the United States is shivering through brutal cold as most of the rest of the world is feeling unusually warm weather. However strange it sounds, that contradiction fits snugly in explanations of what climate change is doing to Earth, scientists said.”
What opinion they might have had of public utilities in Canada begging people to shut off everything including the oven and of all things do not even think of charging your marvellous reliable EV the story did not explain. The Weather Network did headline it “A once in a generation cold is taking ahold of Western Canada” but no scientists were marshalled to say such events were becoming far more common, as would have been obligatory if a once in a generation heat arrived.
Just a note to say that a court case is going on right now in DC regarding Michael Mann and the writer Mark Steyn. This case started 12 years ago over comments on the hockey stock graph, and Mann sued Steyn and others for libel. Lawfare is alive and well.
"It seems very counterintuitive and surprising that a warmer planet can actually increase your odds of experiencing severe winter weather events – but that’s what our research has shown"
Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that given enough research funding, any research can be adapted to show whatever the customer wants.
Give me control of all research funding and I will guarantee to have the scientific establishment solemnly declaring that the world is flat.
I have lived on the canadian prairies all my 58 years, brutal cold periods have been common as long as I can remember. There is nothing more evident of mental retardation than trying to tie a cold snap to warming.
For the record our recent cold snap had record cold but was only 4 days so climate change made it colder but shorter than average.
And no I’m not being mean to the retards.
So,lucky you on the Prairies I guess?Your recent cold snap would have been even worse if not for AGW?Oh!Thank goodness for that,eh?
So AGW is to blame for a mild winter,or a bitter cold winter too.Spin the wheel,the dial always lands on AGW!
Computer models don’t “show” anything they weren’t designed to show. Models do not provide data, they describe a theory—the output is not evidence the the theory has any merit.
Mann also sued Dr Tim Ball for being a denier. And lost. And appealed. And lost again. And sued again, having paid not a penny in punishment as ordered by the court. But Dr Ball died recently of old age. So is that a Michael Mann victory?
Mann also sued Dr Tim Ball for being a denier. And lost. And appealed. And lost again. And sued again, having paid not a penny in punishment as ordered by the court. But Dr Ball died recently of old age. So is that a Michael Mann victory?
And my dwindling bank balance proves that I have even more money than ever. At least that's what I've projected on my carefully crafted spreadsheet.
Cohen goes even further: he contends that climate change in the Arctic is directly disrupting the polar vortex….
The problem with that fallacious assumption, is that prolonged cold snaps are due to a well developed Polar vortex - which are entirely predictable and normal. Weeks before the NA deep freeze, this particular VERY STABLE Polar Vortex was hovering over Northern Russia and China, plunging those affected cities to temperatures of -60°C to -70°C for weeks!
Climate "Scientists" are great story tellers.
the same junk science that is predicting the inevitable demise of our planet in 6 short years also predicted we would see an imminent ice age thirty years ago, which of course never happened. The difference between the two fallacies is that science today censors its opponents, shuns debate and attacks with ad hominem anyone who draws the wrong conclusions.