atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#4031: Snow!

With nothing scheduled today, I had to get up approximately whenever the hell I felt like it, and that turned out to be about 3:30 because Mrs. Fungus and I got to bed rather late last night. Despite the cats' best efforts, I remained abed. did, it turns out, Mrs. Fungus, who somehow managed to sleep through the alarm. I don't know how--it woke me up--but the next thing I knew after it was turned off, she was getting back into bed with me and saying it was past 1 PM, and that she'd called off. She's still in bed as I type this, even though--


It's 11/11/13 and it is snowing outside. The grass is frosted with snow and the roofs are already white, but the pavement is merely wet. It hasn't been cold enough, consistently enough, for snow to really stick to pavement yet. If it keeps going some might stick, but I'm not going to bet on it; anyway it looks like it's a wet snow and it won't be sticking around in any event.

This is the earliest snow in my recent memory. In 1997 it snowed in Cedar Rapids in October, enough to accumulate and knock out the power for a large chunk of the city, but that was Iowa and it was still sixteen years ago.

The date of the first snow usually has no effect on what the winter is like, but of course you'll get the usual comments from people: "Oh, it's going to be a bad winter" blah blah blah etcetera.

Well, it's pretty, and I like it, so WTF.

* * *

Speaking of weather--

Banning freon saved the environment. *sigh*

As Purp explains:
Anyone who wants to keep pimping it needs to explain how their mechanism somehow bypasses the heat equation, and magically gets atmospheric heat to jump deep into the ocean without warming the surface waters significantly first. That's an amazing David Copperfield class trick if you can pull it off.
It's always an amazing trick when you can completely bypass the Laws of Thermodynamics, isn't it? One might even call it a miracle. But it was the best that the warmistas had...until now.

The new claim is that by curtailing the use of CFCs we have changed the curve for global warming, and the "pause" (ie the complete lack of warming since 1998 despite ever-higher concentrations of CO2) is due to the phase-out. It was only done to save the ozone layer, but it's had the side effect of preventing 0.2° of warming, and that--goes the "theory"--is why reality is not matching the computer models.

Problem: we're using as much refrigerant as ever, and (of course) refrigerants absorb a great deal of heat, and despite the strictures of the Montreal protocol refrigerants are still ending up in the environment. It's just that said refrigerants are CHCs rather than CFCs. (The problem, we were told, was with the chlorine atoms in the molecules. How does replacing fluorine with hydrogen fix that? We've gone from chlorofluorocarbons to chlorohydrocarbons; there's still chlorine in the damned things. But OHNOESTEHOZONEZ, so here we are.)

Other problem: there is still the little matter of the sun being in an extended minimum, because it's not a perfectly constant energy source--which, by the way, rather nicely accounts for all the climate change ever.

But no one will buy climatologists Porsches if the sun is the cause of climate change. So now, with much handwavium and number-fudging, they will claim that a past econazi success--which had no other real effect on the climate--will end up being the reason global warming just stopped in 1998. Yeah.

Or, rather, no.

* * *

Meanwhile, it's snowing outside, and it's warm inside, and that's what counts.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.