News Columns & Blogs

Pro-con: Do blizzards disprove global warming?

The news of blizzards must send chills up the spines of global warming adherents, for whom this winter has been marked by discontent. Several of the movement's high priests have been exposed as charlatans. The famed "hockey stick" chart — cited as indisputable evidence that the planet has been warming for a century — was exposed for fraudulently doctoring data to "hide the decline" in temperatures. When the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that glaciers were melting as a result of the selfishness of mankind, the claim turned out to be a fabrication. The left now must dig itself out from under more than just snow. Public acceptance of a massive cap-and-trade scheme to control carbon emissions shrinks as snowdrifts climb ever skyward. — Washington Times editorial

The 2009 U.S. Climate Impacts Report found that large-scale cold-weather storm systems have gradually tracked to the north in the United States over the past 50 years. While the frequency of storms in the middle latitudes has decreased as the climate has warmed, the intensity of those storms has increased. That's in part because of global warming — hotter air can hold more moisture, so when a storm gathers it can unleash massive amounts of snow. Shouldn't climate change make it too warm for snow to fall? Eventually that is likely to happen — but not for a while. In the meantime, warmer air could be supercharged with moisture and, as long as the temperature remains below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, it will result in blizzards. It's a mistake to use such storms to disprove climate change. Weather is what will happen next weekend; climate is what will happen over the next decades and centuries. — Bryan Walsh, Time