Solid evidence points to late, record ice-out on Lake Winnipesaukee
 

By DAN SEUFERT
Union Leader Correspondent
<table style="float:right;margin:0px 0px 10px 10px;width:1;font-size:10px"><tbody><tr><td>
</td></tr></tbody></table>
http://www.unionleader.com/article/2...RE03/140329495

Possibly one of the most depressing posts we will see today!

:emb: Oh NO! a late Ice Out :emb:

:fire: Place large magnifying lenses at strategic locations to start melting the ice

global Warming.....yeah my foot

"Global Warming" doesn't necessarily mean rising temperatures. It really means "climate change." "Climate warming" is kind of a misnomer. Also, I have read that a La Nina is setting up in the Pacific, which, for us, could signal a cooler and wetter summer than normal. :(

I have to agree that it's going to be a late Ice Out this year. I have (jokingly) been saying it will be July 3rd. Before that the water will be too 'chunky' for my boat!

Actually it's El-Nino.

My guess is that it's not a record this year, but it will be very late for sure.

Ya Right
 

Ya well Al Gore couldn't prove the weather was warming and some data showed it was cooling so the name was changed to "climate Change," That way no matter what happens it's mans fault.

ToW

Tomorrow is supposed to be 36...that will help!:laugh:

I have an idea!
 

Worked in China!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HBpYvONXgM

You watch. When we stay in the ice age for the next few years, old AL will start calling it "Global Cooling". Although "Climate Change" covers all his bases, so maybe he will stick with this name. He also has some swamp land in Florida he'd like to start selling. What a joke.

Bad news, Good news
 

The good side is that with snow covered ice, milfoil, which grows under the ice if it gets sunlight, will have a slow winter growing season. A couple of years ago, we thought we were making progress in Back Bay, and the warm winter resulted in huge milfoil regrowth.

Other good thoughts?

Actually...it's both. Two different things. El Niño is related to warmer temps, and La Niña is related to colder.

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/la-nina-story.html

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/el-nino-story.html

I had started a thread in the Weather section a few days ago.. here is the official info on the "oldest ice"

Attachment 9106

The documentary "An inconvenient truth" was filmed in 2004. In the documentary Al Gore stated that the process of global warming would result with colder temperatures about a decade from them. It seems to me that is a more accurate forecast from 10 years ago then the one from last week.

I place concerns for global warming right along side concerns for cancer from cigarette smoke. There are constant warnings ignored by people until the doctor says they have cancer then it's too late to stop

Hmm, isn't it funny that not to long after it came out most if not all the assertions the "documentary" made were debunked by scientists. I mean you can choose to believe what ever you want, but Al Gore is only interested in doing one thing, padding his pockets and pushing a political agenda. Want proof, read on here:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/mo...oreerrors.html

I won't even get into how hypocritical he is considering his own fossil fuel consumption. :rolleye2:

Just sayin... as for ice out, I'm still holding out it'll go out before May... but I doubt it. Last weekend it was as if it was mid January out there on the lake. Made for some nice snowmobiling.

Think globally, act locally
 

It appears to be an outlier year. The west US had an unusually dry and warm winter while the east US was cold and snowy. No matter when we have iceout, the watershed has not been this frozen on March 26'th, in my 25+ years watching it. Meanwhile, the polar ice cap continues its decline.

The changing climate triggers political debate, because cleaning up from all the anomalies is expensive. New budgets, laws and customs have to change along with the climate. But not everyone is on the same page. In all probability, some inconvenient truths are real, and some not. In some cases, the discussion boils down to science versus beliefs.

One truth is; we have been getting record setting downpours in NH over the last 10 years. Just to be safe, the state changed the design codes for drainage culverts to specify one size larger pipe than previous codes. the hope is that fewer roads will wash out. That's the pragmatic approach that I hope most agree with.

The global issue, with no easy answers is; who pays for third world countries climate woes.

It's not political, it's science.
 

Call me crazy but I trust the data that NASA provides. The fact that anyone would read NASA's take on climate change and still believe ANYTHING that says climate change is not real baffles me.:confused:

If you want real information from real scientists read this.

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

I agree with you.

The "world" and the environment is very complex, and it goes through long-range (like multi-century) variations over time. But it doesn't take a lot of knowledge to look at the general state of the environment and realize we're not doing ourselves any favors.

There is also this odd trend of not agreeing with "data" if it can't be sourced back to someone that shares your same political affiliations.

I'm generally not a fan of Al Gore, and I don't consider him a scientist. But I think his overall concern that the environment is changing for the worse is valid and is rooted in real evidence. Like many that seek "fame" over all, I think he probably diluted his own impact by trying to over-reach with his message, but again, that doesn't change the fundamental facts about the environmental trends.

I don't think anyone is debating that the climate is changing, it's more a question of why. When one volcanic eruption can spew more greenhouse gasses than has ever been generated by man, it does seem a bit silly to see junk like this portrayed as "real" science when in reality it is selective facts strewn together to formulate a particular conclusion. Sadly everything these days have some sort of ulterior motive behind it instead of having a real study/evaluation of what's going on done in a manner that is free of any particular agenda.

Does this mean that we as humans take reasonable steps to keep our environment and plant as clean as possible? Absolutely. However the lengths to which this has been taken legislatively at our own expense is silly. Brainwashing kids at school with Al Whore's movie is a sign of the times. Thank God there are still private schools out there that still educate versus indoctrinate.

Boy it would be nice if all this extended ice cover and cold weather would rid the lake of milfoil!

I have absolutely nothing to do with La Nina!! :)

No Al Gore fan either!
 

I am not a fan of Al Gore either but how about practicing what you preach: Al Gore's inconvenient truth from ABC News:

"Armed with Gore's utility bills for the last two years, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research charged Monday that the gas and electric bills for the former vice president's 20-room home and pool house devoured nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-hours."

"If this were any other person with $30,000-a-year in utility bills, I wouldn't care," says the Center's 27-year-old president, Drew Johnson. "But he tells other people how to live and he's not following his own rules."

IMHO, Al Gore is in it more for the celebrity aspect than for the actual cause. He has taken up climate change as his mantra to try and stay relevant and in the spotlight.

So, yes, he is most likely a hypocrite, however the fact that the messenger is flawed does not mean that the message itself is flawed.

What has changed
 

Looking at the May ice out dates it appears that we have had a May ice out date roughly every 15 years since the late 1800's. Three times in my life time. No sure what has "changed" over the last 127 years. What is interesting is that three times in that period we have had May ice outs in back to back years.
Does that mean 2015 may be a May ice out as well?

Should we try our best to protect/preserve our environment - you bet!
Should the politicians and thier crony friends get rich in the process - no thanks!

As always just follow the money to the truth.

Salmon tournament in danger
 

I was going to sign up for the tournament on May 14th but think I'll wait a few weeks. Does not look like Ice will be gone by then. First year I'm retired and could be out on the island so what does mother nature do but have a record ice out! On the side thread started on global warming, when someone says "It's never been warmer than now" remember dinosaurs roamed the Hudson Bay of Canada before the "last" ice age. There have been many warm and cold cycles in the planets long history. The problem man has is that he thinks he's too important in the planetary scheme.

Don't forget how he travels around the globe in his private Gulf Stream airplane!! You could paste his ugly face in Webster's dictionary under Hypocrite.

It's not both going on right now. We are in the process of a possible El Nino developing.

My belief is that once the ice starts going it is going to go real fast with or without Mr. (know it all) Al Gore say so and I personally think it will be gone before May.:)

sorry for what I started here

Lmao
 

Perfect! :laugh::laugh::laugh: How's the fishing afterward?

Just remember, Ice Out does not mean that all the ice is gone. There has always been areas that still have ice when they declare Ice Out. It only matters for the mount and you will likely have a large portion of the lake to fish with. Get your ticket and your gear ready and have a good time.

Unless of coarse you are located in one of the areas that will still have ice, then well, I don't know what to tell you!:laugh:

I doubt the ice will linger that long, however usually the water temps around mid May are in that 50-60 degree range, that may not be the case this year so the fishing may not be quite as good.

This will be our second year owning a boat, so I am wondering.....I know that ice-out pertains to The Mount, but, generally speaking, how long should you wait to safely venture out on the lake? I've been told that there are pieces of fallen trees and old docks that can lie just beneath the surface and cause damage to your boat -- and that the debris sinks to the bottom with sunlight and temperature.

I usually like to wait a week or two after ice out for the debris to get blown on shore. I think the biggest danger is hitting tree limbs or other wood pieces floating along.

This year I may have to venture forth without that safety margin. I'll just drive slower and keep a sharp lookout.

The next week with lots of rain and temps above freezing most of the time will tell us a lot about how quickly things might start moving.

I'm impressed with how much of the snow cover has evaporated, despite the cold temps.

Fairly easy, drag a net, and pre cooked. Just needs reheating :laugh:

Floating debris is one problem, missing/moved/damaged markers is also something to be aware of. The MP does a good job to get out there and fix them but it's usually some time before they can get them all done so you really need to know where you are, or better put where hazards are with or without markers.

I don't know about global warming, but the air we breathe sure is taking a beating...indoors, and outdoors: http://www.livescience.com/44365-air...-8-deaths.html

http://i.livescience.com/images/i/00...jpg?1386787930
Shanghai before sunset in February 2008, seen from the Jin Mao tower observation deck. The sun has not yet dropped below the horizon; it has simply reached the smog line.

Rusty,

Without getting too political, that is why I go a little crazy when I see what we are mandated to do in the US re. pollution when our "competitors" do little!

You picked up the reason I posted that picture...thank you!

We can't fart anymore without someone testing the air to make sure it passes the EPA's requirements.

You people really think that there's no such thing as global warming? So the fast that the average world temperatures have been rising for decades, that doesn't count because you get one cold winter? But at the same time you are going to be wondering why your food prices are up, the irrigation allowances in much of California have been set to 0 (ZERO) for this year, so most of the fields are bare this year. In 1997 I stood at Lake Louise in Alberta and looked at the glacier at the other end of the lake, but last year it was totally gone. Europe was slammed by super storms this winter, but that isn't because the weather systems are now more energetic? The thing is that all you need to do is wait and see. So far everything is turning out as I expected.

Lets take a look
 

Guess they should have had fewer cars back when the earth was warmer than now, say about 1,100 BC.

Temp swings are normal. I'm not saying that man may not contribute a little to it but volcanos and the sun far out weigh anything man has or can do except atomic war winter.


ToW


http://www.winnipesaukee.com/photopo...history_1_.jpg

Hurry up and melt

That caption is so funny!

The Weirs Cam is showing a reflection on the ice today. That's the first I've seen since I started watching the cam this winter.

Took this an hour ago.

I am out here on Bear Island, but it's been warm all day. There is still a good snow pack, but with these temps it's melting off. The lake is pretty much covered in water, makes snowmobiling across more like riding a jet ski. Ice surface is still solid though. Probably my last trip out here till the ice is gone. Sure is nice, have the whole place to myself.

I did notice that openings around the docks are getting larger so it's melting. I'm still thinking ice out may be a little later than usual but I don't see a record ice out.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/03/30/9eperu6a.jpg

Hello all! I don't post here much, but I do read pretty regularly. Thought you'd like to see the view from my webcam (this is the channel between Moultonborough Bay and Green's Basin - near Ambrose) at about 5:00 this afternoon. The opening at the end of the dock is much bigger than it was yesterday and the snow is melting.

There's hope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All together now:
 

All together now: Turn on your bubblers....

Bear Ice
 

Power on? Our camp is in cove behind Shepard Island.

I took this on the 23rd, from about the same spot. :) I agree, some pretty good progress!

Nice picture Diz!

Attachment 9111

Took a ride this morning and was impressed with how much snow melted over night. It was also nice looking across Paugus Bay and seeing the reflection of lights on the lake, even if the reflection was on puddles.
I also noticed the ice formations in my coves were bisected with a small strip of open water.
Progress...

Yup power is on, lights were flickering a bit last night as the wind picked up but nothing unusual. Looking real wet out there this morning. I'll go take some pics and post them before I leave today.

Currently 39 degrees, light wind, no rain.

I was out at my place on Welch island yesterday and underneath that 1" or so of rain water on the top, is still over 2 feet of ice!

The shoreline was still solid as a rock around the island and on the main shoreline in Gilford. The Glenadale ramp was still very solid with trucks pulling trailers with bob houses off without issue. Full size SUV's, cars, hovercrafts, ATV's and snowmobiles were out all over the lake yesterday.

Should be some good melting occurring this week, but we have a looooong way to go...

Hang in there!

Dan

True, but the way back to shore was a wet one some places the water was 6-7" deep and looking out across the lake it looked more like it was ice out. Pretty crazy!

Wow. These are some of most interesting pictures I've seen of the lake. Thanks for posting everyone.

Crack opening...
 

Take a look at the last 2 hours toady, of the WiersCAM, the crack developement on the left half of the screen. Looks to be melting rather quickly. :)

Beg to differ
 

The global average temperature has not risen for 17 years. While I fully agree that one cold winter does not tell the tale of climate, neither does one hot summer.

Food prices are going up because we have been diverting our growing to producing ethanol instead of food. Of course, regional droughts and other severe WEATHER can produce shortages of commodities.

As to the California drought, the New York Times in March stated "At present, the scientific evidence does not support an argument that the drought there is appreciably linked to human-induced climate change." This is another weather event.

As to the frequency and strength of storms, the tornado and hurricane activity has reached decades low levels in the last few years. These changes are cyclic and people who theorize Global Warming have been forced to admit that there is no proven link between "warming" and hurricane frequency or intensity. To borrow your "one cold winter" example, one Sandy does not "increasing intensity of storms" make.

If everything is turning out "as expected", how come the models are completely unable to explain the pause in global temps? There has been speculation about the cause but NO proof. The models don't work. People that support warming theory have written emails to each other complaining that the models don't work.

Sorry to go off on this "tangent" but it really annoys me to hear speculation about climate change that is flat out unproven. I don't think this forum is the place for this debate but I didn't raise the point.

There it is, right on our own WiersCAM. More proof of rapid melting due to global warming!! ;) :D

It all depends how you look at it and whether you take in to account what you would expect due to the various cyclic weather effects.

What you are doing is called a straw man argument, there is a way of looking at some of the data that can be interpreted as showing that nothing is happening. But even the Koch brother's shill at Berkeley now gave up trying to argue that it wasn't happening and fell back to trying to prove it isn't caused by us.

http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators

But in the end it doesn't matter to me what you think. Plenty of people, especially in the US, would rather believe that there's no problem and it's certainly nothing to do with them. So it is very unlikely that anything will change. So wait and see. That's what people are doing anyway. The trick would be to find a way to make good money out of being right.

....ok....so it's April 1st and there's still a little bit of ice and snow left outside.....thank goodness.....you know I was worried that it would all melt overnight!

Love short history
 

Why is it that the global warming folks always look at history of the "last few decades?" Sure temp has risen during that time, well except for the last few years when the temp has not risen?

If you want at look at global temperature history over time then look at history. Say the last few million years.

http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/the...rature-swings/


Go here and pick out the chart that supports your theory. If you look closely you will see that most of the charts that support man made warming go back not much more that 40,000 years. However if you really want to debate cause and effect of warming pick the charts that go back 25 million years or more and see what the causes are.

https://www.google.com/search?q=glob...w=1280&bih=623

Global warming is not a settled science as Al Gore says it is. Far from it. There are way to many factors that are not understood and not taken into account in the models use to support man's affect on warming.

All we can do is to keep an open mind and continue the debate along with scientific analysis of ALL the factors that contribute to both warming and cooling of earths temperature.

ToW

Don't get me going on ethanol
 

I love how ethanol was suppose to be the savior from fossil fuels. It does more to "pollute" the environment then anything. The use of fertilizers on poor land that was suppose to not be used. The run off of those fertilizers effecting water quality. The use of fossil fuels to produce the ethanol. Finally the CO2 that gets "dug up" in order to plant the corn.

Don't get me going on ethanol

Don't forget the part where it takes much more energy to produce ethanol.

I wonder what will happen with the Winni Derby if ice-out doesn't happen by then???? May 16,17,18th

Stop wondering, it will be declared way before that. ;)

Even if it is not...
 

... There will be plenty of open water for fishing.

but I agree that ice out will be before then.

UNH Climate Change Study - 2014
 

UNH released its study today on climate change in NH. Here is the link to the general announcement and here is the link to the study results for northern NH.

There are many interesting graphs that show the trends over the last 115 years and several model projections through the end of the century. I found the data on ice-out, rainfall and growing seasons interesting. It also showed that hot days are not getting hotter, but cold days aren't as cold as they were.

The report is refreshing, in that most of it is historical data. Future model projections come later in the report and recommendations are last. It isn't about what happened a million years ago, or will happen a million years from now, but what to watch for in our lifetime. They acknowledge model and scenario uncertainty, and have three pages addressing uncertainty, but feel they have a good handle on the short term scenarios.

Overall, a good read, because it is about our back yard.

earlier ice-outs
 

Earlier ice outs could also easily be attributed to more development around these lakes. More impermeable surfaces within a half-mile of the lakes results in warmer warm-water runoff into the lakes. Removal of shade trees surrounding the lakes, increased use of circulators for docks, solar reflectivity of surrounding structures, etc., all could be contributors. Yes, that's man-made impact, but does not support the governments money grab for pollution tax.

Climate change.... Yes, something is happening. But what, and why? Our level of scientific discovery has gone faster thanks to technology in the past few years. As soon as we discover something, we discover something else. For example, we know of cycles we didn't know about a few years ago. It all affects the credibility of science voices who can't seem to say anything nowadays without new evidence saying something else. That's just a fact of life no one thinks much about. However, I think we can safely say we don't know everything. We do know this much:

1. The climate has always been changing, along with everything else on earth. Rapid changes have occurred before, with catastrophic results to life. Nothing on earth ever stays the same.

2. Climate change predictions come from computer models. This past winter some really great computer models failed to give us accurate forecasts for *tomorrow.* Yay, computer models...

3. By the rules of science, until something is proven 100%, it's still a theory that is open to *discovery* I say discovery in place of "discussion" because science doesn't care what our opinions are. Discussion produces laws of society but we don't have the authority to write scientific laws. They are what they are, before we even know about them, and all we can do is discover them. Pure science does not recognize, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." American law does. Don't confuse American law with science.

4. Human psychology says we respond to the hand that feeds us, no matter what position of honor we're in. Therefore, it's important to consider the source(s) from which we take our information.

- All government agencies are paid by politicians who have the power to cut budgets or increase budgets.

- Private media outlets answer to advertisers and/or the big companies that own them.

- Public radio and TV get money from the government, the audience, or both. If it's "audience only," then we must consider the general views of whoever the audience is.

Humans have (in the past) made statistics and science support almost any personal view they ever wanted to promote. We humans have an inner desire to control one another. Before we accepted science, people were using religion to control one another. Now we have science in addition to religion; why wouldn't we use that in the same way? The main idea is, "I don't like how you think and act, and I love how I think and act, so I'm going to force you somehow to think and act how I think and act." It's human nature.

Your best bet for learning unbiased science is to take it upon yourself to understand the natural process for exactly what it IS, outside of whatever your opinions are. We think we need someone else to tell us, but we forget that at some point in history, someone had to learn it by discovery and observation. We have it in ourselves to do that, if we want to. Newton did. The Wright Brothers couldn't study "aeronautics engineering" in school, because no one had invented it yet. In order to invent the airplane they had to study birds and the flaws of previous man-flight attempts.

If you want to understand how air moves around the planet you can start by looking at smoke and steam flow, the next time you have a bonfire or boil water for pasta. Look at water flow in the lake, see how waves tumble objects around, and remind yourself that air is a fluid too. See how hot and cold air, dry air and steamy air interact and move around in your home. Get a home weather station, keep records, take notes, and occasionally review them to see "bigger pictures." Study the process for what it IS, and then look at unbiased, real-time information like satellite and radar imagery, etc. I might add that you can learn a lot about weather by studying fire. (Disclaimer: Do not light fires without the permission of your local fire department.:D)

I'm not saying that's all you'll need to learn, but if you trust other humans 100% to be your teachers without independently observing and learning, you're probably unknowingly accepting a few of their own statements of self-interest along the way. Even the most unbiased humans can still be wrong ("This ship is unsinkable," they said. "That volcano is dormant," they said.)

As for the idea of a record late iceout (this thread's topic,) I say it's possible, and it won't say much about climate change if it does, any more than the record early iceout of a couple years ago did.

That is because the lake ice requires conditions beyond "just temperature" in order to form or melt.

The ideal conditions for thick lake ice include:

1. Very dry air in fall, with clear nights. Cloudy days are helpful by shutting out sunlight, but the dry air is the most important.

2. Very cold November or December, with snow *until the lake is actually frozen.* Snow chills the water but insulates the ice once it has formed.

3. CALM conditions for actual ice formation. Wind has a history of delaying ice-in and mechanically forcing iceout.

4. Very cold with clear, calm nights, without much snow until the ice has thickened substantially.

5. Tons of snow from February onward. This insulates the ice from the rays of the sun which become more direct in February. The days become noticably longer in February, too.

6. Melting and refreezing of snowpack on the frozen lake adds thickness to the ice. It doesn't form a high quality layer but it still counts because it still has to thaw in spring.

7. Cold days in spring help keep the ice thick. This past month it even grew a little.

For early iceout, it helps if the lake ice doesn't have much snow on it. It also helps if there's a lot of wind to flex the ice pack constantly. Sunny days and cloudy nights from February onward help to weaken it.

Once there is open water, it warms up much faster if the air is humid than if it's dry. I've seen 90-degree days fail to raise the water temperature simply because the air was so dry at the time (west wind, fire weather warnings, no burning allowed... that kind of day.) A 70-degree day with a 65-degree dewpoint does a lot more to raise the water temp than a 90-degree day with a 32-degree dewpoint.

The two biggest factors in starting iceout, (by my observations) are sunlight and water level rise. Sunlight heats up the land and the rocks, which in turn melt the ice back away from themselves. Water level rise literally lifts the ice away from the shoreline by making the lake bigger than its icepack. Once the ice has lost its grip on the shores, it starts to melt faster.

Once it starts to melt, we need a lot of sun and wind to make it go quickly. Warm temperatures obviously play a role, but a record warm spring isn't going to melt thick lake ice in a hurry without help from wind and sun.

This winter we got most of the factors that produce and retain thick lake ice. We haven't had our usual wind, either. Usually at some point during the winter we hit 50 mph, or even 60 mph at this station. We've been no higher than 39 mph so far this year.

Unless we get a huge storm with 2-3 days of 40+ mph wind and gusts over 60, and more than a day or two of record warm temps, a May iceout is likely this year, and a record late iceout is possible.

I may be wrong, but I think a record ice-out is unlikely at this time. Nothing really points to an unusually cold April at this time, although that could change as arctic air will be just over the border. The pattern in the long range will try to flex a SE US ridge which may mean warmer wx and rain after mid month.

As far as climate change goes, leave it out of the thread. Some of you are misinformed.

Yup, the longer we go without some weather on the higher than normal end of the scale (winds, temperature), the more likely the record iceout is threatened.

Our temperatures in March were well below normal and recently have barely been average. However, given the right conditions, things can change VERY rapidly. Weather seems to have a way of balancing itself out over time. Low temps are eventually "balanced" by a run of higher temps. Long periods of calm and dry balance with stormy periods. Given the winter we have had, we might eventually see some warmer than usual periods but who knows and who knows when.

Thanks for your considered words on climate. Per Heraclitus: "Nothing endures but change.", which is certainly true for climate. I agree that we are FAR from knowing the full climate story and the prescription we are being sold to "fix" the climate is like leaches used for bloodletting over a century ago. We should continue to learn more and take reasonable steps to improve our impact on our environment, which, for the most part, we have already been doing.

Green guru James Lovelock:

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/04/...lobal-warming/

Someone needs to put out a search party for global warming. It's been missing for 17 years 8 months now: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/0...s/#more-107042 :laugh:

Interesting chart, but are there really accurate records from 2200BC following the earths temperature??

Ben Franklin
 

Once said, and this is a true statement "Some are weatherwise but most our otherwise" Alot of the otherwise are on this board. :D

I believe the highest concentrations of the most dangerous "otherwise" can be found in Wash, DC; at the UN; and at the Weather Channel. People on this board can do no harm; the other concentrations aim to do the most harm possible.

As a matter of fact
 

Yes there are.

In the polar ice cap cores. In the earths crust cores. To name a couple.

Sample cores tell a lot about what the climate was in history. Example, coal is formed from deposits that need tropical like climate to form. So the coal located in Canada comes from tropical forest that were there millions of years ago. How about dinosaurs? They needed warm climate to live and could not survive in Montana today but were there in the past.

So if you are asking did some weather person take the temp of the day and write it down in a book? The answer is no but the earth recorded its' own temperature history in the rocks, swamps, ice caps, etc.

ToW

Thanks
 

Thanks for your valued addition to the debate. I see you backed you position up with scientific data to support you hypothesis.

ToW

I guess it is hoping too much to stay on topic, fascinating though the subject is. Particularly as the debate will resolve the issue of climate change on our Forum and the world is waiting.

Quick question, is there anything anybody on this forum could say to change your opinion on global warming? No, me either, so let's stick to ice out.

Please hurry!

Ice Out
 

For most of 91 years my father was looking for Ice Out on his birthday, today would have been 92, and Ice Out has never happened on 9 April, before yup, after yup, but not on the 9th I surely hope that Ice Out will happen before my birthday 30 Sept. However if it doesn't perhaps it will start freezing again before it thaws out. Time to sharpen the keel of the pontoon boat to make it ride like ice skates.

John, my son was born on April 8th. It was a difficult birth. He's now a very buff 24 yr old, who loves the lakes region. That is ALWAYS my ice-out guess. Some day maybe...

john maybe by your birthday we will start the ice in contest

Try looking at it from the other Coast
 

I'm sitting in California. It was 87 on Wednesday. Sounds great to some. Just that, it's so bone dry out here, there are not-insignificant communities in this state that, if we don't get 4+ inches between now end end of May (doubtful), will be out of water. Have to be shipped in by tanker trucks. Now do some scary math. The Central California Valley, where a LOT of your fruit and vegetables come from, will be out of water in+/- 60 years. The only thing that will change that is if the sea levels rise high enough, as currently predicted by 2100, to flood the Central California Valley with salt water.

You guys are up to your eyeballs in cold, white fluffy stuff, but a LOT of the rest of the world is baked dry. Governments, institutions and corporations are already jocky-ing for positioning against water supply. Not suggesting there isn't noise in the data. But, in the southwest and west, the climate has changed, whether man-made or not, and what's left on or under the ground we're chewing threw so fast, it's going to get difficult.

California made decisions years ago to allow billions if not trillions of gallons of water to be diverted from agricultural and municipal use back to the rivers to help "endangered" fish like the darter fish. It hasn't worked out so well for the fish and now water is in short supply.

I don't come here to read or write this stuff, but since this topic continues on, I'll just point out, the designator for global warming has changed to global climate change. The models predicting rapid disastrous change have not panned out. The scientific community is certainly not settled on the predictions of the IPCC, which are alarmist. The climate has been changing for billions of years, the evidence that this is being caused by human fossil fuel use is dubious at best. The proposed solutions, some being implemented, are a financial and economic disaster, resulting in expensive energy, solving nothing and, as usual, disproportionally negatively affecting the most vulnerable among us, the elderly and poor.

California has gotten itself into a pickle to satisfy some environmentalists who value fish over people and whose predictions of how the fish will be saved have not panned out since this madness started 20 years ago.

Also to mention that California has grown its population and water usage in defiance of a lack of sufficient and reliable water for many decades. They have tried to "manage" the issue but the reality is they have too many people and too much water demand for the water resources available. The projection of worse situation to come in the future is no surprise and doesn't need any "change" of climate to make it happen. California's water usage was unsustainable to begin with.

....AND the water is coming from a state that is having water shortages of it's own as well. Colorado's front range has exploded with population. Water management has been a big problem there for a long time.

But I'm sure we will soon be blaming the increase in population on "climate change" as well.

The other coast
 

Guys. You're missing the point. To you, out there where it's wintry cold, the climate doesn't look like it's changed. To the West, couldn't be clearer.

I'm not from California. Grew up on the Lake and call it home. California's a stupider state than you give it credit for:liplick:

LA sucks the west coast dry, taking huge amounts of water from the Colorado river and even from northern California. But San Francisco is about as far from LA as Winnipesaukee is from Philadelphia PA. Water from Lake Shasta is poured in to the Sacramento river system and flows more than two hundred miles south to the Sacramento river delta, near Mountain Home it is pumped up to the start of the aquaduct which takes it near 400 miles south to San Bernadino. Shasta alone can contain 4.5 million acre feet of water.

Considering how little rain there is in the west it has always surprised me how much food is grown there and how wasteful it seems. But the reservoirs in the Sierras contain years worth of water.

Thinking CA is stupid and this doesn't affect you, now that would be stupid. Lot's of bad things happening in the world right now, politically and physically. If the west and the plains stop producing food... well you don't grow much in the North East, do you?

And the latest climate change news, even only looking at historical data, not modelling where we are going, says it's 99% certain that humans did this.
http://www.ibtimes.com/there-99-chan...ta-not-1570996

I really don't care what anyone believes, I am looking forward to seeing high tide closing the road the Newcastle from Portsmouth. The way to look at it is that we are watching a 100,000 ton train that has been pushed. Now that we can see it moving towards us our chances of stopping it are minimal. We are going to be run down. But believe what you like, it won't change anything.