Climate Contradictions: The Snowfall Records in a Year of Heat
The article recounts the personal experiences of the author with changing weather patterns during the holiday seasons, contrasting memories of frigid winters with recent milder temperatures.
This serves as a springboard for a wider reflection on the implications of global warming and the future of winter as we know it, especially the phenomenon of snowfall.
From the very first moment I carved a path on the corduroy at Sierra Summit, a quaint resort nestled just outside of Fresno, California, skiing captured my heart. Those early years, where the crisp mountain air and the exhilaration of each descent became a cherished ritual, ingrained in me a profound love for the slopes.
The mere thought that this part of my identity could be threatened by a future devoid of snow was devastating. It drove me to sift through data and expert analyses. To my relief and somewhat vindication, I discovered that the doomsday predictions about the end of snow were overblown. While climate change is an indisputable reality, its impact on snowfall is far more nuanced than the simplistic narrative of an imminent snowless world.
On one hand, the year’s designation as the hottest on record aligns with the long-term trend of rising global temperatures since the last glacial maximum. Such statistics are often cited as signs of a future where traditional seasons blur, and the crisp, snowy winters fade away into a warming world.
The concern that children might grow up in a world where snow is a novelty, or even a historical curiosity, reflects the profound anxiety created by the climate-industrial complex.
On the other hand, the concurrent setting of snowfall records presents a jarring contrast to these warming trends. In 2023, ski resorts like Alta in Utah and Mammoth in California reported record-breaking snowfall totals, challenging the prevailing narrative of diminishing snow covers due to global warming.
These resorts, nestled in mountainous terrains that have long been destinations for winter sports enthusiasts, saw an unprecedented accumulation of snow that not only delighted skiers and snowboarders but also confounded expectations set by a year characterized as the hottest on record.
The copious snowfalls at Alta and Mammoth challenged simple correlations between rising average global temperatures and the decline of snowy winters, illustrating the complex and often regional nature of weather patterns and the common confusion of weather and climate by the MSM.
The sheer volume of snow, the record at Alta was more than 150 inches above the previous record, serves as a testament to the variability inherent in climate systems, and it underscores the importance of considering local and short-term climatic phenomena in the broader context of global climate change.
Snow records being set after a year that has pushed temperature boundaries is an ironic twist. It serves as a real-world reminder that while the overall trend may be toward warming, regional and seasonal extremes of cold and snowfall will still occur and even intensify in areas.
The 2024 season is still ongoing but seems to be another record-setter.
Furthermore, the article emerging at a time of record snowfall after the ‘hottest year ever’ highlights the pitfalls of exaggerating climate science to the public. It’s a clear reminder that the language used to describe climate trends needs to be carefully crafted to avoid confusion and to help the public understand the distinction between unscientific propaganda and scientific data.
The Rutgers University Global Snow Lab delineates a fascinating snow cover trend across the Northern Hemisphere, with notable seasonal variations over the past several decades. The first image below, representing snow cover anomalies in November, suggests a significant increase in snow cover during the autumn months. This trend might appear counterintuitive in the context of global warming.
An increase in fall snow cover can be attributed to several factors. Warmer temperatures can lead to more evaporation, and, consequently, more moisture in the atmosphere. If temperatures in November are cold enough for precipitation to fall as snow, then this moisture can result in increased snowfall.
Additionally, shifts in atmospheric circulation patterns, such as changes in the jet stream, can also lead to greater snowfall during certain times of the year in certain regions.
In contrast, the second image shows a decrease in snow cover for May, indicating less snow cover in the spring. The decrease in springtime snow cover is more closely aligned with the expectations of a warming climate, where the earlier onset of spring temperatures causes faster melting of winter snow.
These observed changes in snow cover—increasing in the fall and decreasing in the spring—underscore the importance of understanding regional climate dynamics within the global climate system. They highlight that climate change’s impacts are not uniform and that shifts in seasonal weather patterns may have a variety of consequences for the natural world and human activities.
Moreover, these trends pose important questions for climate scientists, as they attempt to refine models to predict not just average temperature increases, but also shifts in precipitation patterns and extreme weather events.
For policymakers and planners, this data is critical for preparing for water resource management changes and anticipating and mitigating the impacts on agriculture, infrastructure, and ecosystems. A much better approach than climate change will likely lead to ‘The End of Snow’.
The annual mean Northern Hemisphere snow extent over several decades reveals a relatively stable pattern, indicating that despite year-to-year fluctuations, there has not been a dramatic long-term change in overall snow cover.
This stability might come as a surprise to those who assume a linear decline in snow extent due to global warming. The data suggest that while certain regions and months may experience decreases in snowfall, overall snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has not shown a drastic decrease over the observed period.
This underscores the complex interplay between rising global temperatures and snowfall, influenced by factors such as atmospheric moisture content and shifting weather patterns. The relative constancy in snow extent speaks to the resilience of Earth’s climate system, and challenges oversimplified predictions about the impact of climate change on winter snow cover… So, don’t fret and I’ll see you on the slopes.
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Howdy
| #
Year of heat? We’ve still got the heating going. It’s normally off by February. Even the plants are only just waking up.
In the last 30 months, only 6 weeks of weather that could be called summer – the rest is rain, snow/hailstone, or more rain.
Reply
VOWG
| #
It is no warmer than it has ever been.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi VOWG,
I have been making a TERRIBLE MISTAKE as I report common NEGATIVE TEMPERATURES. For a negative temperature does not exist. And in thermodynamic equations (like the Ideal Gas Law) the negative temperatures must be converted to positive degrees of Absolute (Kelvin) temperatures.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamic involves the concept of Entropy (disorder) which in NATURAL SPONTANEOUS processes is always increasing. Hence, our organized universe will ultimately become totally disordered which creates the question: How was this somewhat organized universe, we now observe, spontaneously formed? All I can say is the I do not know the answer to this question just as Newton stated that he did not know the cause of GRAVITY.
Have a good day
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Jerry,
Absolute 0 is where an object does not radiate energy but still have internal energy.
Energy flows from greater to lesser and objects equalize with energy. The law of entropy is men nonsense having nothing to of with reality where the flow of energy reduces directed movement.
If I can provide you with one example where an object with less kinetic energy adds energy to an object with more kinetic energy you must agree that the 2 Lot is invalid. A small car moving fast runs into the rear of a large slower truck. The truck has more kinetic energy than the car but the car slows (loses energy) while the truck’s speed increases (gains energy). This is the problem for Mr. Kook that, because the 2nd LoT is a premise for so much of his beliefs, much of modern physics is wrong.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Herb,
My comment was about different temperature scales and my mistake. The publisher (Louis Elzevir) of Galileo Galilei’s ”Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences” wrote a preface to a reader of this book. And as translated to English in 1914 by Crew and de Salvio Louis wrote that a common saying in 1638 was: “intuitive knowledge keeps pace with accurate definition.”
When you wrote “Energy flows from greater to lesser”you made more than one terrible mistakes. I would accurately write: NET energy flows from a BODY with greater SURFACE TEMPERATURE to a BODY with lesser SURFACE TEMPERATURE.
Have a good day
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Jerry,
You again confuse temperature with energy. Temperature is a function of both mass and energy but it is only energy that is transmitted between objects. The object with greater energy (velocity), in a collision, will transfer energy to the object with lesser velocity regardless of how much energy is being radiated from the surface. (Law of conservation of momentum.)
Reply
MICHAEL CLARKE
| #
Shut up Jerry!
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Michael,
Good to learn you are still reading my comments. For I know your are a true Genius based upon what your have done in the past.
I have reread my comments and I must ask: Why your comment?
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Michael,
Newton and you were Genius’s because to your mathematical abilities. I am no mathematician; However, because I grew up poor on a farm I learned to be practical.
Just before I read your comment I had gone to the internet to learn the date of the Normandy landing and found it was June 4, 1944. Now I have just checked what the moon’s phase was near that date.for a practical reason. that a high tide in the early morning was a practical factor as was that June 4, 1944 was a Sunday morning. For it was common knowledge that the Germans enjoyed their beer and Saturday night was the common night of partying. And foggy conditions were known to be seasonally common in the Spring Season along the English Channel.
So I practically reason that an accurate predication of the atmospheric conditions was not the critical factor. A beachhead had to be established on the continent that spring or the war would very likely be lost. June 4 was 2 days before the full moon phase with its maximum high tides and obviously all the necessary heavy equipment could not be landed in a few hours of high tides each day.
Michael, friend, do you follow my practical reasoning?
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
E-Day June 6 1944
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Correction D Day June 6. Schedule for June 4 but postponed due to weather.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Michael,
I am PERSISTENT, as well as practical, and I discovered that I had not yet read critical information. (https://tide-and-time.uk/tidal-predictions-d-day-landings). For I was reasoning they would try to land near high tides and that, as you can read, is WRONG!
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply