"Children just aren't going to know what snow is"

"The wolf is not coming, he's enjoying winter sunshine!" paraphrases the now infamous article in the Independent in March, 2000 - "Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past". Why reproduce it again? I confess I enjoy a good chuckle gloat, and confessing seems to be the fashion these days. I recommend you read the original if you need cheering up, or simply want to snigger.

According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.

Wait, there's more

David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes - or eventually "feel" virtual cold.

Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. "We're really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time," he said.

For the record, here's a chart of northern hemisphere snow extent, showing the "rare and exciting events".

Northern Hemisphere Snow Extent 1967-2011

And here's a satellite picture of a "rare and exciting event" in 2010.

It wasn't 20 years time, but 10 years time, and it wasn't occasionally, but a hat-trick of bum-freezers. Three "very rare and exciting events", the successive winters of 2009/10, 20010/11 and 2011/12 produced snow, lots of snow, cars abandoned in snowdrifts, and they were bloody cold. The BAA (who run Heathrow airport) had bought into the "winters are warmer, snow is a thing of the past" theme preached by these idiots, and failed miserably to clear the runways with their inadequate equipment (not only size, but numbers matter). Troops with shovels and brushes finished the job the experts had flunked.

Luckily each was, in the words of David Parker a "virtual experience of snow" with "virtual cold", so no one died, no cars were stuck in snowdrifts, no airports closed for three days, no motorways were closed, no local authorities ran out of road salt and grit, and no train and bus services were cancelled. UK citizens didn't need the internet to "wonder at polar scenes", they just had to look out of the window at the white mound that contained their car.

For some reason seemingly unknown to the BAA, Reykjavik and Helsinki airports remained open and didn't cancel a single flight while Britain "ground to a halt" (in the words of the newspapers who'd also bought the theme). At those airports, flights or landings are occasionally held up for as much as 30-40 minutes while they clear the runways of several times the depth of snow it took the Heathrow crews three full 24-hour days to clear. Heathrow ran out of de-icing fluid for aircraft. Reykjavik and Helsinki have large stockpiles, far more than they use even in a severe winter, "just in case". Staff and officials there laughed at Heathrow's plight. "It's just snow" they said.

Gatwick airport, not run by the British Airports Authority (BAA to them!). much smaller and less busy than Heathrow, with less money to invest and with fewer runways and taxiways, had twice the number of snowploughs and blowers than their larger cousin, and of course staff to use them, and suffered much shorter closure as a result. Perhaps the managers there are sceptics (in the true sense), or at least have a little common-sense and foresight. Perhaps, like blogger Harold Ambler, they are just prudent, and think, as he does "Don't Sell Your Coat" just yet.

A side order of fries with your words, messrs. Viner and Parker? Prediction is very difficult, especially when it involves the future.

Warming Winters? Meteorologist Paul Douglas' disconnect with reality.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune warns "Warmer winters bring tick-infested springs"

In Minnesota, black-legged ticks have expanded their territory since 2007. More people live in wooded areas where ticks thrive, more mice and other rodents that carry Lyme disease survive warmer winters, and more ticks "hitchhike" on birds and humans.

Then follows some statistics about tick-borne disease (including the nasty "Lyme disease"), and the increasing prevalence of ticks in Minnesota, which I don't dispute. However, at the end we get a (second) quote from meteorologist Paul Douglas:

Winters in Minnesota have grown milder since 1998, Douglas said, with a steep reduction in Arctic air that was common even 20 or 30 years ago. "It's a slow-motion evolution," he said.

That "grown milder since 1998" is precise and checkable so let's do it, starting with NOAA's National Climatic Data Center's data for Minnesota:

NCDC Winter temperatures for Minnesota, 1990-2011

Apart from a downward tick for 2001, average winter temperatures have declined since 1998 (the peak). There's even a statistical downward trend since 1990. Focus in on Minneapolis-St.Paul, 1998-2011:

NCDC Winter Temperatures for Minneapolis-St.Paul 1998-2011

Other cities and towns in Minnesota show a similar trend from 1990, with pronounced cooling since 1998. The NCDC chart shows a downward trend of -0.88°F (-0.49°C) per decade, a whopping 8.8°F (-4.9°C) per century, the Minneapolis-St.Paul data an almost incredible 63.1°F (35°C) per century.

Where has Mr. Douglas been the last two decades, particularly since 1998? More to the point, where does he get his data to support his comment? Who is this Paul Douglas? Wikipedia knows - it seems he's an (ex-) TV weatherman, columnist and blogger. The Wiki page soon reveals something rather relevant :

Douglas regularly writes and speaks about global warming and is critical of those who say that it is not occurring or is not caused by human actions.

I write about global warming and I'm critical of those who say that something is occurring (warmer winters in Minnesota) when it's not. Mr. Douglas thinks Global Warming "deniers" are "immoral" ("Paul Douglas: 'I'm a recovering Republican, and I don't recognize my party any more"). I think those who tell the opposite of the truth are immoral.

As for Mr. Douglas' "steep reduction in Arctic air that was common even 20 or 30 years ago", have a look at "Arctic warming, increasing snow cover and widespread boreal winter cooling":

Abstract

The most up to date consensus from global climate models predicts warming in the Northern Hemisphere (NH) high latitudes to middle latitudes during boreal winter. However, recent trends in observed NH winter surface temperatures diverge from these projections. For the last two decades, large-scale cooling trends have existed instead across large stretches of eastern North America and northern Eurasia. We argue that this unforeseen trend is probably not due to internal variability alone. Instead, evidence suggests that summer and autumn warming trends are concurrent with increases in high-latitude moisture and an increase in Eurasian snow cover, which dynamically induces large-scale wintertime cooling. Understanding this counterintuitive response to radiative warming of the climate system has the potential for improving climate predictions at seasonal and longer timescales.

"For the last two decades" - I nearly ran out of fingers, but I'm pretty sure Mr. Douglas' 1998 is in there somewhere. Who's the "denier" now?

UPDATE 30th Jan. 2012

The Hufffington Post (such a goldmine of unbiased opinion!) says "On Climate Change, Weathercasters May Be Misguiding Their Viewers"

"If you look at the stats over the past five or six years, the public's belief that global warming is a serious problem, or is even happening, is declining," said Daniel Souweine, co-founder of the nonprofit Citizen Engagement Lab. In fact, nearly 40 percent of Americans are not convinced that the earth is heating up, according to the latest Pew Research Center poll.

"We think that's a result of the fact that they're not getting the right kind of information about what the science says," Souweine told The Huffington Post.

We've proof that one, in particular, isn't giving the "right kind of information", as I've shown graphically.

UPDATE 6th Feb. 2011

I found I'd used a GISS dataset for an entirely different Minneapolis for my original chart (should've spotted  the different lat/lon - silly me!), so to save time sorting THAT out I've substituted the NCDC plot for Minneapolis-St.Paul for the relevant 1998-2011 period.I've altered the text to suit - If anything it reinforces my point.

UPDATE 12th Feb. 2011

On his his Star Tribune blog is a "Send Paul a question" link, so I've done just that, and here it is:

A few weeks ago, you were quoted in a Star Tribune article on ticks in Minnesota:

"Winters in Minnesota have grown milder since 1998, Douglas said, with a steep reduction in Arctic air that was common even 20 or 30 years ago. "It's a slow-motion evolution," he said."

http://www.startribune.com/local/east/137802778.html

I'm interested in temperature trends, and often use the NCDC "Climate At A Glance" page to check trends for the US. However, using the form for Minnesota http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/mn.html to plot winter temps since 1998 shows them to have been declining. I wonder if you could point me to a source that shows the opposite?

I'll let you know if I get a response.