The Climate Model Effect

Since the models predicted that Colorado would lose its snow, the snow has gone crazy.

 December 28, 2007

Aspen flirts with powder record
Only December 1983 tops this month.

ASPEN — This month is shaping up as the second snowiest December in Aspen since someone started keeping records in 1934.

Dec 26, 2008

Good News! Record Snow, It’s DEEPcember On Slopes Again in Aspen

May 5, 2010

ASPEN, Colorado — If it felt like the snow never stopped in April it wasn’t just your imagination.

Aspen appears to have set a record with 36.35 inches of snow for April, barely eclipsing the old mark of 36 inches in 1970, according to Charlie Bailey, water treatment supervisor with the Aspen Water Department.

Thursday, March 31st, 2011

Aspen Snowfall Records were beaten this week as the best Powder Skiing in the history of Spring Skiing was enjoyed by the Jet-Set New York crowd who flies West each season for their own special blend of “March Madness”. Meanwhile, back in NYC, unwelcome snow was just causing a big mess for those not so fortunate, back on the grind for the 1st day of April…


About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to The Climate Model Effect

  1. Dave G says:

    Can’t be, the models say otherwise!!

  2. suyts says:

    lol, probably related to the Gore effect!

  3. Latitude says:

    Well the models did predict that it would hurt the ski industry…..

    ….just not the way they figured, closed due to too much snow LOL

    • Jimbo says:

      They said the same thing about the ski industry in Europe. The last 3 winters beg to differ. Now they blame more snow on global warming. They can’t have it BOTH ways unless it’s a religion.

      • Latitude says:

        Anyone with 1/2 a lick of sense….
        …would point out all their predictions as proof

        That they don’t have a friggin clue……………

  4. Daniel Packman says:

    The report from May 2010 in Aspen doesn’t reflect the lower overall snowpack in the state that year.

    • Do you see one shred of evidence that snowfall is on the decline?

      • Daniel Packman says:

        Snowfall is a highly variable quantity … it can vary by a factor of two year over year. We will need decades of data for a two sigma signal to emerge.

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        Record snow is a sign of global warming when we were told snow is a thing of the past and ski resorts would close? Good one Baghdad Daniel.

        It’s not “Climate Change”. It’s “Prediction Change”.

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        stevengoddard says:
        April 30, 2011 at 4:50 pm

        Do you see one shred of evidence that snowfall is on the decline?

        He danced around that one.

    • Daniel Packman says:

      The annual precipitation in Colorado shows a slight decline over the last 150 years. And the depth of snowfall and/or snowpack in the middle of winter is more variable and of less interest. More important is snowpack later in the year which means the ability to irrigate land and support ecosystems.

    • Daniel Packman says:

      The graph shows “winter northern hemisphere snow extent”. This doesn’t show moisture content, nor does it show the more important mid spring snow extent which is the real concern.

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        the more important mid spring snow extent which is the real concern

        You guys a cherry picking that particular piece of information out AFTER THE FACT and trying to use it to scare people.

        You really are Baghdad Daniel!

      • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

        You know Daniel, I’m looking more closely at that graph and there really isn’t anything important happening like you are saying.

        Did you take take some time to look at it before linking it here? Or, did you find it on a global warming web site and just put it here without really understanding it?

      • pwl says:

        Of course this inconvenient graph shows a clear trend of increasing winter snow coverage in the northern hemisphere from 1967 to the present.

        Woops, don’t you hate it when the data mucks up one’s beliefs? Actually embracing the facts of life observed in the objective reality of Nature can be bracing and forms the basis of the scientific method. The real question is how long before the co2 climate doomsday alarmists actually begin to recognize that their beliefs and their doomsday hypothesis is just not working out as they soothsay with their digital crystal ball climate models? How long does it take before they recognize their models are out to lunch?

  5. Paul H says:


    I am glad you acknowlege that we need decades of data to establish proper trends.

    I am sure you are also aware that the severe drought in the Colorado basin lasted for much less than a decade. Since 2005 NASA confirm that –

    In the latter half of the decade, the drought eased somewhat. Precipitation was near, but still slightly below average in the Upper Colorado River Basin

    As you say, we can draw no long term significance from either of these facts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s