SeanInWayland

22 hours ago, snowlover91 said:

So no different than the random articles posted on here about random/unusual/historic warming in portions of the world? Got it. 

Btw the content in that article you linked is correct. The Antarctic has in fact been cooling and recently did hit record levels of ice cover in recent years. The cause for that is disputed among scientists but it is correct in that regard. 

By the way the “person who runs xx site believes xx so the article isn’t credible” is a logical fallacy. The OP cited Greenland SMB gain which is well documented on plenty of other sites. Sure, it doesn’t mean the earth is cooling or anything else but that specific article and the one you linked are both accurate in regards to Greenland SMB gain and the Antarctic. 

Yes, no different than random articles posted here containing similar kinds of information about warming/melting/drought events. It's typically used as a bull**** method of indirect argumentation, as is what I cited. I presume you're not saying someone shouldn't criticize that website because there are other silly people out there engaging in similar tactics but with a different axe to grind, right? Bull**** is bull****, and should be labelled as such. I would encourage you also to call out the obvious examples of it that you clearly are thinking of, instead of just starting off with your "whatabout this!" statement, that gives the strong impression that you seem to think I am willing to put up with all other kinds of nonsense and only call this out because of some particular bent I have. That's not a particularly effective way of convincing me, or anyone for that matter.

I typically don't post in here because I'm not nearly as well-versed in the details of climate science the way many here are, but it doesn't take a meteorologist to assess the quality of all meteorologically-related material. Marshaling a set of facts doesn't in itself make for a useful exposition without some analysis or thesis to tie those facts together. I frankly didn't see any at that site, and I found it's constant grandiose references to the sunspot cycle as some uber-important driver of climate conditions on the ground to be off-putting. I would be less off-put if the author simply stated his position, and then offered a cogent argument as to why he thinks it's right.

You seem to be passionate about this topic, so let me offer something I'm hoping we agree on. The Earth's climate is complex, and your recent posts seem to indicate you feel the same way. Discerning the truth abut a complex system is hard enough, but it becomes doubly or triply hard when people spew out poorly-constructed arguments advocating some particular viewpoint and demand that we spend the time to evaluate in detail their claims. Frankly, that's just impossible because it's easy to spin out lots of bull**** (which often contains many facts, a good sprinkling of them is critical to the effective bull****ter) but much harder to paw through it all and explain in detail to someone why it's bull****. That's why I posted my warning about that site after someone posted what I now realize was a clickbait message to entice people to go look at it.   It has all the markers of someone spewing the kind of time-wasting bull**** I described above. If the person who runs that site wants to get people to take the time to consider their arguments, they should present them in a way that says they can be taken seriously, and trusted not to be engaging in bogus argumentation. I don't think that is too much to ask.  

On 10/29/2018 at 12:37 PM, WarmNose said:

https://electroverse.net/greenlands-cold-and-snowy-summer-sixth-highest-smb-on-record/

 

good read 

Here's another "good read" from that site:

https://electroverse.net/arctic-antarctic-sea-ice-now-at-historic-high-levels/

It's an amusing mix of anecdotal "hey, somebody just had a large/early/late/historic snowstorm" articles, mixed with simple cut-and-paste from select journal articles implying that the earth is cooling, or ice sheets are expanding, etc., etc., and without any real context or analysis.

By the way, whoever runs that site seems to have an idee fixe about the sunspot cycle and its effect on climate.

28 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Epic in metrowest to N RI and E CT. Absolute crushage....

 

 

Yeah, I'm on top of a hill here in Wayland and we're getting pounded. 12" new now.

7 minutes ago, Ginx snewx said:

pivotalweather.com

Thanks

1 minute ago, rnaude241 said:

That is a NUKE on the 3K. WOW

Link please?

Albany almost never gets over 20".  We seem to often hit an 18" wall with the "big storms."  We average a 20"+ storm about every 14 years.  You guys closer to the coast get some rocking storms!  I'm just hoping for 6"+ here.  Often with these SNE jackpot storms we get shafted.  Hopefully we don't get subsidence city from a death band to our east.  Spread the wealth.........but whatever happens, it is what is is.  

Yeah, know how it is, grew up in Guilderland not far from Slingerlands, and even in our berserker winter of 70-71 we just had a ton of 8-14" snowstorms, no real blockbusters. Of course, Dec 69 was somewhat different:-)

OTOH, snow comes earlier and stays a lot longer in ALB and its environs than in the Boston coastal plain, so there's that.