• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Will Canada see its first white Christmas since '71?

Gill

Gill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Messages
8,713
Reaction score
1,907
Location
The Derby City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The first day of winter brought wind-chill warnings, snow and a bevy of storms to cities across Canada on Sunday, potentially laying the groundwork for the first cross-country white Christmas in nearly four decades.

Environment Canada senior climatologist David Phillips told CTV Newsnet that "it looks like a very good chance" it will be a white Christmas for all parts of Canada for the first time since 1971.
Click to expand...
CTV.ca | Will Canada see its first white Christmas since '71?

It's been an early and severe winter throughout North America. When it snows in Houston, New Orleans, and Las Vegas in December, you know the more northern areas of the continent are getting pounded.

Will it continue for the remainder of the winter? Who knows, we'll all have to wait and see.

Feel free to post your favorite winter weather stories here.

Merry Christmas!
 
Winter truly arrived in Beijing yesterday with the highest temperature of the day down to minus 8.8 ℃. Media reports say it was "the coldest day in December in the last 57 years."

Strong wind ripped off part of the metal roof of a university's gymnasium and the thermal insulation layer of a hotel in Beijing. It also blew away a man who was mending his own roof in Shijingshan District. The man landed on the top of a 15 meter-high tree and was rescued by firefighters (see front page image).

According to Sun Jisong, a meteorologist from the Beijing Meteorological Bureau, the cold weather will not last and the temperature is going to rise to above zero in the coming days.
Click to expand...
Beijing's coldest December day in 57 years
 
This should be in *Breaking News*, not in this forum.
 
Middleground said:
This should be in *Breaking News*, not in this forum.
Click to expand...
Is it any surprise it would be a lib that tries to play Editor in Chief. It's the natural penchant of the Marxist. To control the flow of information. Why would this be?

I sense an annoyed Lib because the GW template seems to be melting on a world wide scale.

Bury it... bury it. ( In snow :)
 
zimmer said:
Is it any surprise it would be a lib that tries to play Editor in Chief. It's the natural penchant of the Marxist. To control the flow of information. Why would this be?

I sense an annoyed Lib because the GW template seems to be melting on a world wide scale.

Bury it... bury it. ( In snow :)
Click to expand...


How wonderful! Another denier who cannot tell the difference between weather and climate! :applaud
 
zimmer said:
Is it any surprise it would be a lib that tries to play Editor in Chief. It's the natural penchant of the Marxist. To control the flow of information. Why would this be?
Click to expand...

Zimmer,

To be fair, Middleground did not suggest that the message could not be posted. She only suggested that it belonged in breaking news not the Environment and climate subforum.

I sense an annoyed Lib because the GW template seems to be melting on a world wide scale.
Click to expand...

Climate is long-term in nature. Weather deals with individual events. A specific weather event does not, by itself, offer insight into how the climate is evolving, just as a large daily gain or loss in the stock market does not determine whether or not one is in a Bear or Bull market, much less whether things are shifting. Only a long series of events sheds such insight into such matters.

Unless I am mistaken--and she can correct me if I am--that's what I believe Middleground meant. She did not suggest that one could or could not debate climate change. She did not argue for material concerning prospects for the first white Christmas in all of Canada since 1971 to be excluded from DP's discussions and debates.
 
donsutherland1 said:
Zimmer,

To be fair, Middleground did not suggest that the message could not be posted. She only suggested that it belonged in breaking news not the Environment and climate subforum.



Climate is long-term in nature. Weather deals with individual events. A specific weather event does not, by itself, offer insight into how the climate is evolving, just as a large daily gain or loss in the stock market does not determine whether or not one is in a Bear or Bull market, much less whether things are shifting. Only a long series of events sheds such insight into such matters.

Unless I am mistaken--and she can correct me if I am--that's what I believe Middleground meant. She did not suggest that one could or could not debate climate change. She did not argue for material concerning prospects for the first white Christmas in all of Canada since 1971 to be excluded from DP's discussions and debates.
Click to expand...


You're not only smart and eloquent, you're a mind reader too.

Damn you, Mr. Sutherland! ;)

On another note, but on topic, Ottawa came within a few centimeters of breaking the all-time record snowfall last year. The record year? It happened in 1971.
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
Is it any surprise it would be a lib that tries to play Editor in Chief. It's the natural penchant of the Marxist. To control the flow of information. Why would this be?

I sense an annoyed Lib because the GW template seems to be melting on a world wide scale.

Bury it... bury it. ( In snow :)
Click to expand...

That's the second post I've read of yours where you misread the post you reply to and then go off on an anti-liberal anti whatever takes your fancy rant.

Here is the other one - that time around you accused the poster you misread of being a reporter "for SNL? Or for Der Spiegel?"

I'd get someone to double check future posts before you press the "submit" button if I were you - especially if you're going to go off on a rant...
 
Middleground said:
How wonderful! Another denier who cannot tell the difference between weather and climate! :applaud
Click to expand...

Another warming alarmonazi who wouldn't admit the weather is showing the climate cooling if it was 32 degrees in Miami on the Fourth of July.
 
MrVicchio said:
Another warming alarmonazi who wouldn't admit the weather is showing the climate cooling if it was 32 degrees in Miami on the Fourth of July.
Click to expand...

If it were 32 degrees in Miami on the fouth of July for 5-10 years consecutively, yeah, that would be worrisome.

Two years ago, it about 61 degrees on Xmas day in Ottawa, one of the coldest (if not, THE coldest) capitals in the world. I remember taking pictures, as I had annuals still alive and well, and had pondered whether I should have mowed my lawn before heading to my folks house for dinner. I didn't start no alarmist thread here at DP, or anywhere else. I simply enjoyed the weather that I termed freaky.

So now, Mr Vicchio, do you understand the logic?
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
Another warming alarmonazi who wouldn't admit the weather is showing the climate cooling if it was 32 degrees in Miami on the Fourth of July.
Click to expand...

Godwin's law. Outstanding.
 
Middleground said:
How wonderful! Another denier who cannot tell the difference between weather and climate! :applaud
Click to expand...
Weather-climate; add the two together and you get trends.

You believe in global warming... er climate change?

Well, your "theory" is based on much the same premise as taking a weather event and basing a religious movement on it.:monkey

Looking at the short history and long, how would the short ice age in the 1500's be factored today and what stupid moves would the Algorski's of the world suggest we take? How about the dust bowl in the 30's? What about the planet being 7 degrees warmer in the 1300's? Did they have auto's and modern industry then?

No.

They used to produce wine in south Bavaria 600 years ago. It was a wine region, and they didn't have hybrid plants. Now it's too cold. It's become a beer region because of it.

So we can regulate the climate? Cool it when it's too warm, and warm it when it's too cool? Cause the oceans to warm and cool? Control the sun? Manipulate water vapor (a gas they don't know the role of and can't figure out how to factor in climate models)?

Then you have to look at the Hockey Stick Graph debacle, and the recent bit where a 13 or 14-year old found flaws with NASA's climate calculations. The last ten years haven't been the warmest in the last century, but early in the last century.

So..."Denier" of logic... your claim of differentiating between weather and climate rings hollow.

Tell me, there are thousand of experts out there that don;t believe the tripe being propagated by the likes of Algore. Why do you never see these people on TV?
 
Last edited:
Middleground said:
If it were 32 degrees in Miami on the fouth of July for 5-10 years consecutively, yeah, that would be worrisome.

Two years ago, it about 61 degrees on Xmas day in Ottawa, one of the coldest (if not, THE coldest) capitals in the world. I remember taking pictures, as I had annuals still alive and well, and had pondered whether I should have mowed my lawn before heading to my folks house for dinner. I didn't start no alarmist thread here at DP, or anywhere else. I simply enjoyed the weather that I termed freaky.

So now, Mr Vicchio, do you understand the logic?
Click to expand...

I understand logic, you how ever understand only rhetoric. As one of the few people TRAINED in atmospheric sciences here, you dismiss my POV ont he grounds that I was just a "meteorologist" and claim I can't tell the difference between weather and climate. You throw that line out there so often we have a pool going to see how fast you'll do it.

So please, spare me the logic talk, you have ZERO training in weather models, climate or anything to do with the science of prognosticating what the earths weather systems will do, or what the climate will do.

You CHOOSE to believe that mans 3% contribution is causing an imbalance in the delicate weather system soon to lead to disaster! You ignore all science, opinion or other evidence to the contrary. I read all the evidence, I read the papers, and gasp I can actually understand what's being said.

When you boil away the crap, there is some small chance man might have a small effect on the climate. That's it. SMALL, minuscule, hardly worth noting effect on climate over a long period of time. IF the models are right and IF certain things happen a certain way.

However, Our models aren't good enough to predict the weather more then 3 days out, why the hell do you trust someone that says they can tell you what the climate will be like 10 year, 100 years from now?

Seriously, it's 3 DAYS, and even then that's pushing it. All models have biases in them, NOGAPS for instance will deepen lows more then is probable, under certain circumstances. This has been learned over long periods of time and lots of research. You have to know this use it.

I think it's the solutions proposed that appeal to you politically more then anything else that attracts you to the AGW side, and the fact you allow yourself to believe somehow you are a "champion of Mother Gaia"
 
MrVicchio said:
I understand logic, you how ever understand only rhetoric. As one of the few people TRAINED in atmospheric sciences here, you dismiss my POV ont he grounds that I was just a "meteorologist" and claim I can't tell the difference between weather and climate. You throw that line out there so often we have a pool going to see how fast you'll do it.

So please, spare me the logic talk, you have ZERO training in weather models, climate or anything to do with the science of prognosticating what the earths weather systems will do, or what the climate will do.

You CHOOSE to believe that mans 3% contribution is causing an imbalance in the delicate weather system soon to lead to disaster! You ignore all science, opinion or other evidence to the contrary. I read all the evidence, I read the papers, and gasp I can actually understand what's being said.

When you boil away the crap, there is some small chance man might have a small effect on the climate. That's it. SMALL, minuscule, hardly worth noting effect on climate over a long period of time. IF the models are right and IF certain things happen a certain way.

However, Our models aren't good enough to predict the weather more then 3 days out, why the hell do you trust someone that says they can tell you what the climate will be like 10 year, 100 years from now?

Seriously, it's 3 DAYS, and even then that's pushing it. All models have biases in them, NOGAPS for instance will deepen lows more then is probable, under certain circumstances. This has been learned over long periods of time and lots of research. You have to know this use it.

I think it's the solutions proposed that appeal to you politically more then anything else that attracts you to the AGW side, and the fact you allow yourself to believe somehow you are a "champion of Mother Gaia"
Click to expand...

You know, Mr Vicchio, I grow weary of constantly having to repeat myself over and over again like I'm some kind of machine. I don't know what I have to do to make a point stick to some people, so I will try one more time. I can only hope this time it will sink in.

First, your experience as some type of "meteorologist," is moot. We have come to the conclusion that you are somewhat confused about climate because of what YOU--yes, YOU--post as fact that global warming is a myth. Time-and-time again, you either start a thread, or make some irrelevant post, that because it is unusually cold one day in some part of the world, there's no way GW can be real. And, because of your irrelevant "it's cold in Texas (or wherever)" posts or threads, you are called out on them by those who know the difference between climate and weather. It's that simple.

Because of the above, is it any surprise why you are being corrected? :confused:

So two things can happen from this. The light bulb in your head can go on and you'll think, "yeah, it was kind of silly of me to make these irrelevant posts/threads." Or, you'll ignore this post, and continue on with your irrelevant posts that clutter potential worthy and constructive discussion.

Your choice.
 
Middleground said:
You know, Mr Vicchio, I grow weary of constantly having to repeat myself over and over again like I'm some kind of machine. I don't know what I have to do to make a point stick to some people, so I will try one more time. I can only hope this time it will sink in.

First, your experience as some type of "meteorologist," is moot. We have come to the conclusion that you are somewhat confused about climate because of what YOU--yes, YOU--post as fact that global warming is a myth. Time-and-time again, you either start a thread, or make some irrelevant post, that because it is unusually cold one day in some part of the world, there's no way GW can be real. And, because of your irrelevant "it's cold in Texas (or wherever)" posts or threads, you are called out on them by those who know the difference between climate and weather. It's that simple.

Because of the above, is it any surprise why you are being corrected? :confused:

So two things can happen from this. The light bulb in your head can go on and you'll think, "yeah, it was kind of silly of me to make these irrelevant posts/threads." Or, you'll ignore this post, and continue on with your irrelevant posts that clutter potential worthy and constructive discussion.

Your choice.
Click to expand...
I see, my experience is moot, but your forum genius is superior. MY ten YEARS of training, and earning a living in the field of meteorology is worthless, but your five minutes on the "earth first" web sites you visit makes you smart, intelligent and in the know.

Yes, that's right folks, MG read a web site, that told her what to think, thus anyone else, no matter ACTUAL real world experience... doesn't count.

You're what I like to call, a computer chair genius. You read it on Wikipedia! You saw algores movie, YOU are smart.

Me, I just got paid, promoted and rewarded for my understanding and grasp of the SCIENCE... what do I HAVE to offer the discussion? I mean really... I don't agree with political entities on AGW, I don't agree with the UN IPCC and worst of all, I don't agree with MG.

MG of course couldn't earn a penny with her "knowledge" of weather, climate or otherwise in the real world, but on this forum, she's a certified authority.

Right oh.

Here, educate yourself lady:
Meteorology vs. Climatology: How Time Means the Difference Between Weather and Climate
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
I see, my experience is moot, but your forum genius is superior. MY ten YEARS of training, and earning a living in the field of meteorology is worthless, but your five minutes on the "earth first" web sites you visit makes you smart, intelligent and in the know.

Yes, that's right folks, MG read a web site, that told her what to think, thus anyone else, no matter ACTUAL real world experience... doesn't count.

You're what I like to call, a computer chair genius. You read it on Wikipedia! You saw algores movie, YOU are smart.

Me, I just got paid, promoted and rewarded for my understanding and grasp of the SCIENCE... what do I HAVE to offer the discussion? I mean really... I don't agree with political entities on AGW, I don't agree with the UN IPCC and worst of all, I don't agree with MG.

MG of course couldn't earn a penny with her "knowledge" of weather, climate or otherwise in the real world, but on this forum, she's a certified authority.

Right oh.

Here, educate yourself lady:
Meteorology vs. Climatology: How Time Means the Difference Between Weather and Climate
Click to expand...

I'm all for learning, but why should I be in need of educated on the difference between climate or weather? Is it you, or I, that is guilty of starting threads on "oh, my, it's freezing outside today, I guess global warming is a myth!"

So who starts those threads or posts... you or I? :confused:

As far as your background, as I said, it's irrelevant. One does not need any credentials in order to know the differences between climate and weather. Having said that, one that's credentialed (you) that does NOT know the difference (based-on you DP posting history) is somewhat puzzling. How can you not be aware of the difference? :confused:
 
MG I bring up these really cold weather moments, because it's funny to watch people liek you scream "climate not weather". Yet we are subjected all the time to "Heat wave proof of global warming say experts" "An ice burg broke off an ice shelf today, alarming some scientist as to the impact of man"...

You never come out and go "weather not climate" when those events occur. Your all mighty attitude is both petty and misguided.
 
Gee dude scientist...make up your minds!





Friday, February 13, 1998 Published at 19:25 GMT



Sci/Tech

Scientists blame sun for global warming
image: [ The Sun is more active than it has ever been in the last 300 years ]
The Sun is more active than it has ever been in the last 300 years

Climate changes such as global warming may be due to changes in the sun rather than to the release of greenhouse gases on Earth.

Climatologists and astronomers speaking at the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Philadelphia say the present warming may be unusual - but a mini ice age could soon follow.

The sun provides all the energy that drives our climate, but it is not the constant star it might seem.

Careful studies over the last 20 years show that its overall brightness and energy output increases slightly as sunspot activity rises to the peak of its 11-year cycle.

And individual cycles can be more or less active.

The sun is currently at its most active for 300 years.

That, say scientists in Philadelphia, could be a more significant cause of global warming than the emissions of greenhouse gases that are most often blamed.

The researchers point out that much of the half-a-degree rise in global temperature over the last 120 years occurred before 1940 - earlier than the biggest rise in greenhouse gas emissions.


[ image: Ancient trees reveal most warm spells are caused by the sun]
Ancient trees reveal most warm spells are caused by the sun
Using ancient tree rings, they show that 17 out of 19 warm spells in the last 10,000 years coincided with peaks in solar activity.

They have also studied other sun-like stars and found that they spend significant periods without sunspots at all, so perhaps cool spells should be feared more than global warming.

The scientists do not pretend they can explain everything, nor do they say that attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions should be abandoned. But they do feel that understanding of our nearest star must be increased if the climate is to be understood.
Click to expand...




BBC News | Sci/Tech | Scientists blame sun for global warming
 
MrVicchio said:
MG I bring up these really cold weather moments, because it's funny to watch people liek you scream "climate not weather".
Click to expand...

So you do know the difference, and you're simply a troll.


Yet we are subjected all the time to "Heat wave proof of global warming say experts" "An ice burg broke off an ice shelf today, alarming some scientist as to the impact of man"...You never come out and go "weather not climate" when those events occur.
Click to expand...

Good luck finding a "it's soooo hot outside today, it's gotta be because of global warming!" I have never started anything of the like, because I know that it would be stupid.

As for the iceberg point, ah, that would be climate. Icebergs don't melt in a period of a few days. Because of that, it seems that climate is changing in certain parts of the world. I see that you are still struggling with the concept of weather and climate.

Your all mighty attitude is both petty and misguided.
Click to expand...

I'm just trying to help you here.
 
I never said you did start one. Check the web any time there is a hot spell anywhere in the world.. "ZOMG GLOBAL WARMING: MAN KILLS EARTH!" is the headline, details don't matter. WE that see the AGW movement for what it is, laugh.

So it's hilarity when someone like you gives us crap about weather and climate... your entire movement demands such.
 
MrVicchio said:
I never said you did start one. Check the web any time there is a hot spell anywhere in the world.. "ZOMG GLOBAL WARMING: MAN KILLS EARTH!" is the headline, details don't matter. WE that see the AGW movement for what it is, laugh.

So it's hilarity when someone like you gives us crap about weather and climate... your entire movement demands such.
Click to expand...

So just because it's happening somewhere on the web, you decide it's best to pollute this forum with useless threads? :roll:

Oh, it gets better. You then have to nerve to blame the other side of the argument for doing the SAME as you are here, ironically enough.

**shakes head and wonders why I even bother**
 
Middleground said:
So just because it's happening somewhere on the web, you decide it's best to pollute this forum with useless threads? :roll:

Oh, it gets better. You then have to nerve to blame the other side of the argument for doing the SAME as you are here, ironically enough.

**shakes head and wonders why I even bother**
Click to expand...

It's 60 degrees here. Yay global warming!!!
 
Middleground said:
So just because it's happening somewhere on the web, you decide it's best to pollute this forum with useless threads? :roll:

Oh, it gets better. You then have to nerve to blame the other side of the argument for doing the SAME as you are here, ironically enough.

**shakes head and wonders why I even bother**
Click to expand...

I was more talking about say, CNN, ABC News, The Weather Channel, The New York Times, any Al Gore Press conference...

Ya know, the places where you go to get told what to think.
 
MrVicchio said:
I was more talking about say, CNN, ABC News, The Weather Channel, The New York Times, any Al Gore Press conference...

Ya know, the places where you go to get told what to think.
Click to expand...

You forgot Fox News.
 
Can we get this thread back to my original intent??? I wanted this thread as a posting spot for unusual winter weather. That's why I put it in the Environment forum. I'd really like to know who moved it and why.

Here's some more winter weather news:

If the big lake seems to have an unusually placid appearance off Duluth’s shores these days, it’s because you’re looking at ice.

Ice has formed on Lake Superior off the Twin Ports and near Bayfield, among other places. It is the first time in years that ice has formed on the lake this early in the winter season.

The western tip of Lake Superior has frozen over in December for the first time in recent memory, and that could mean a long season of ice angling that hasn’t been seen in years.

“We were just talking that it’s been something like 17 years since we had a good, long ice fishing season at this corner of Lake Superior,’’ said Russ Francisco, owner of Marine General sporting goods store in Duluth. “This is the most ice I’ve seen in December in years. … I wouldn’t go out yet, but if it stays cold and we don’t get a big wind, people will be out there fishing soon.’’
Click to expand...

For the first time in years, western part of Lake Superior freezes over |* River Falls Journal *| River Falls, Wisconsin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom