Tornadoes in the Snow. Yeah, This is All Normal

February 22, 2014

I’m still trying to get used to ‘thundersnow”. Now we have “Twistersnow”.

52 Responses to “Tornadoes in the Snow. Yeah, This is All Normal”

  1. omnologos Says:

    what rubbish channel do you watch Peter?

    It’s all about the “I’ve never seen it” fallacy. Well, that guy cannot remember the same phenomenon from two years before.

    ps IF a lot of snow melts AND a lot of cold comes back immediately afterwards THEN things do not “settle down”. There is a very large risk for smooth, large, almost invisible icy surfaces on roads and all sorts of pavements

    • From you link at Acc

      You should read your on links Omn

      “A map from NOAA NOHRSC says that there was no little snow cover near Stapleton yesterday, but this is only a satellite estimate.

      If it’s NOT snow, what is it? It could be standing water from the storm, reflecting the bright sky above the twister, or it could be ice (lows at North Platte have been below freezing for the last 10 days). I have an email out to Mike, who should know the answer, and I’ll post here when he replies.:

      It ok if you click on the Blog link you get the current info

      “An Improbable Sight. I’ve been doing this for 40 years, and I can’t remember ever seeing something like this. I’ve read reports of isolated tornadoes over the Rockies, briefly passing over snowfields, a very rare meteorological event. But Thursday this (roping) tornado was photographed about 5 miles away from the photographer. Check out the piles of melting slush in the foreground; looks like half a foot (?) of dirty snow in that one clump. This takes weather whiplash to a new (and ridiculously jaw-dropping) level. Photo courtesy of Dana Cottingham Fricke, from Concord, Illinois”

    • rayduray Says:

      WTF omno?

      You castigate the Weather Nation’s Paul Douglas for his comment about snow falling on tornado damage and then you cite a “better source” which includes the following language regarding snow on tornado damage:

      “I personally have never seen it. — Accuweather article

      Omno, do you need to check your meds? You seem to be losing the script here.

      • omnologos Says:

        Yes Ray I specifically mentioned the fallacy both weathermen fell for, however on Accuweather he made sure readers were clear tornadoes on snow aren’t unprecedented – just rare.

        Perhaps too many here respond on impulse – the Weather Channel links haven’t been followed, obviously.

        • Aren’t you tired of repeating this on every record set or rare event that happens on a weekly basis now?

          • dumboldguy Says:

            One of the things about people with IQ’s as low as Omknowlittle’s is that they are good at performing repetitive simple tasks for long periods of time without getting bored or distracted. This actually makes them valuable employees for certain businesses.

            In Omno’s case it just makes him a pest.

      • They don’t make deniers like they used to. A reference offered that disproves his assertion? Let’s see him talk his way out of this one on philosophical grounds. 🙂

  2. Dan Staley Says:

    I don’t know what omnologos thinks he’s trying to achieve, but this old weatherman knows very, very few people who have even heard of a tornado in winter.

  3. Tornadoes take unusual amounts of energy to create.  This comes from convection, driven by release of latent heat by condensing/freezing water.

    It all comes back to warming.

  4. ClimateState Says:

    Welcome to the new normal.

    • greenman3610 Says:

      when the sea ice disappears, we’ll be hearing from Omno that all is normal.

      • omnologos Says:

        you might hear the same from the Weather Channel, and still refuse to change your mind 🙂

        by the way…Dear Kev himself doesn’t see climate change at work in the polar vortex/cold USA.

        There has to be a point when you will give up trying to spot in 2014 something predicted for the 2030s. It’s like being on the Titanic, on the lookout for icebergs right outside of Southampton…a lot of useless and fruitless effort.

        • dumboldguy Says:


          TRYING to spot something that is predicted for the 2030’s?

          Hey, Omnutsos—-What was predicted is FREAKIN’ HERE ALREADY!
          Should we just ignore it and play idiot mind games like you do?

          Actually, it’s like being on the Titanic and actually spotting some icebergs “right outside Southampton”. Only an idiot like you would say “ignore them, they’re not supposed to be there yet”.

          • omnologos Says:

            There were no icebergs outside Southampton. Their absence was irrelevant to the tragedy that were to happen at Grand Banks. Only an idiot would have tried to convince the Captain of the risk ahead by yelling “iceberg!” at every incoming wave.

            The idiot would have most likely been confined to the onboard hospital, highly sedated.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            “There were no icebergs outside Southampton”?

            Lord love a duck, but your “thought processes” are a wondrous thing to behold.

            You are “The idiot that needs to be confined and highly sedated”.

          • omnologos Says:

            your comments are consistent with there being no thought or any other kind of processes going on in your head

          • dumboldguy Says:

            The brilliance of that retort is just breathtaking! If one ignores the irony of Omno’s speaking about “thought processes”, that is. Omno has never had a “thought process” occur in his own head, yet he talks about what goes on in mine?

            Over half the comments on this thread are from OMIGODhe’shereagain or in response to his idiocy. What ever happened to DNFTT? Why do we lack self-control? Peter—-save us from ourselves by giving Omno a time out.

          • Idiot mind games coming up. See, I made a pre post ipso facto omno prediction. More bs from omno.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            “pre post ipso facto omno prediction”?

            I like that, pronounced “puhpiffop”—– add PPIFOP to the acronyms list.

          • redskylite Says:

            “There has to be a point when you will give up trying to spot in 2014 something predicted for the 2030s.”

            What a curious statement by omnologus, does this mean he finally accepts the IPPC’s projections and expertise, ahead of his own personal expert opinions ? Several eminent climate scientists have stated that the IPPC have been too conservative in their projections (perhaps influenced by the machine of denial), on things like sea level rise. US Navy predicted Arctic sea ice free in 2016.

          • ”What was predicted is FREAKIN’ HERE ALREADY!” You are correct, Sir.


          • dumboldguy Says:

            Yes, and Australia is the poster child (or canary in the coal mine) for climate change. Its location on the planet guarantees that it will see more extreme effects of AGW sooner than other parts. It’s unfortunate we in the U.S. don’t hear more about what’s going on down under. We didn’t hear all that much about the UK either, and it’s a lot closer. Denial and parochialism rule.

        • greenman3610 Says:

          I have spoken to Dr. Trenberth at length on this, and I think I understand his perspective. Trenberth and a number of others are pushing back against the media meme that “new science says that climate change may cause colder winters”.
          This is in fact, not what the science in question, Francis/Vavrus 2011, says –
          that shrinking arctic ice may be causing a slower, more irregular jet stream and thus affecting weather.
          Dr Trenberth agrees that we are in a “new normal” that includes more weather extremes, and is caused by anthropogenic global warming.

          • omnologos Says:

            Finally some information among the unbelievable noise by too many content-free stupid commenters around here.

            Perhaps Trenberth will be the author of the first paper showing weather extremes are on the way up (after defining what weather extremes are). For now I’ll applaud his willingness to stop the silly notion of linking global warming to colder U.S. winters.

      • Yeah. Its just a natural cycle. That happened 50 million years ago.

      • j4zonian Says:

        I have never seen sea ice. There never was any sea ice. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

  5. […] I'm still trying to get used to 'thundersnow". Now we have "Twistersnow".  […]

  6. omnologos Says:

    29 comments, 9 by me, 20 by people who cannot read. That’s a comfortable 20-0 lead. Keep going with silly videos and inane remarks.

    • More of a reading comprehension problem on your part. Let’s review

      Omno- “It’s all about the “I’ve never seen it” fallacy. Well, that guy cannot remember the same phenomenon from two years before.” Points to Acccuweather

      Accuweather- “UPDATE: A correction at the bottom of this entry, also, here is a map of where the snow and tornado damage correlate: ….indicated that there had been “zero” snowcover for the last 11 days, though they did report a trace of snow on Feb. 20. Given high temperatures in the 50s since then, it should all be gone. … If it’s not snow, what is it? It could be standing water from the storm, reflecting the bright sky above the twister, or it could be ice…”

      Conclusion No Snow Tornado two years ago. Omno vomiting crow for 9 posts

      (or)Are you still trying to say there was a Snow Tornado two years ago and that Paul Douglas is a ….?

      If so you won my vote for Climate Crock King of the year.

      • omnologos Says:

        For the millionth time, even the Accuweather guy knows it’s a rare but not unprecendented phenomenon, and the fact that he couldn’t remember it doesn’t mean it never happened.

        Meteorology relies on data and archives not hearsay and personal anecdotes.

        Your abject failure to read the Weather Channel page is duly noted.

        Hint: there are tornadoes in February. Second hint: large parts of the US have been covered in snow this February. Third hint: a surge of warm air caused perfect conditions for tornadoes to form this February.

        • Hint: No snowTornado on the weather channel before now!
          No snow on ground during the Tornado only AFTER or had melted before hand until now so.

          It’s all about the “Omnologos” fallacy. Well, that guy cannot remember the same phenomenon from the top of the page before.

          Hint: there has been tornadoes in every month in the USA.


          • greenman3610 Says:

            maybe he’s mixing it up with “Sharknadoes”

          • dumboldguy Says:

            You DO know, of course, that Dave Burton took time off from being science adviser to NC-20 to be the technical adviser for Sharknado?. That’s why it’s full of so much “good science”, particularly regarding sea level and fluid dynamics.

            (Omno is also listed in the credits as “court jester”).

        • dumboldguy Says:

          “For the millionth time”, say Ohnohe’shereagain? Have I really deleted without reading that many of his comments? No wonder I’m wearing the letters off the “delete” key.

        • And omni backs up the goal post with crow feathers in his mouth, changing from there definitely was a snow twister two years ago and Accuweather says so, to everybody knows there have been twisters in February. In which hemisphere? Snow suddenly absent. Hmmmmm. What does that mean? He fibbed? Oh tell me the great magnificent one is not making it up as he goes along. Credibility busted? Yes, I definitely get the thing about comprehension. Why is it I see a trend like this? Deniers grab a headline and fail to read and comprehend the story that undermines their denier dumb.

      • Stand by. Polling numbers just in. News flash. In early polling it seems omno has taken the lead for climate crocks king of the year, and it’s only February. Climate Crocks King of the year, previously called Black Knight of Denierdum, is a prestigious award given to the denier most capable of eliciting What? responses and causing sane, intelligent people intense laughing spasms and face palming.

  7. omnologos Says:

    An evil denier has been spotted at the National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, OK

    Dr. Harold Brooks, a tornado expert at the National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, Okla., says that though extremely rare, there are one or two reliable reports of tornadoes that occurred with temperatures near freezing, though not necessarily during a snowstorm. One such twister was an F2 storm that killed two and injured 12 near Altus, Okla., on Feb. 22, 1975. Tornadoes have also occurred with snow on the ground during warm-ups when pre-existing snowpacks have not melted. Far more common are tornadoes that develop on the warm side of major winter storms that produce heavy snow on their cold northern flank. On Feb. 5, 2008, such a storm produced heavy snow in the central Midwest, while 64 twisters battered the South.

    Should be easy now. Compute how many tornadoes in the snow have been observed in the past, estimate on the basis of the best available science how many are expected in the world of the “new normal”, forecast when next occurrence is expected to be seen, and what kind of trend should be observed in five or ten years from now.

    It’s only thereafter that “yeah this is all normal” will make sense.

    • You need more than one observation to know if this is a recurring “normal” thing. And 1975 is well within our CO2 affecting climate period as well. If these things start to pop up more regularly, they are very likely linked to climate change. We only know this type of event is unusual, and we know something unusual happened just recently. The sum of all unusuals happening this year is a alone enough for me to regard a shift in climate happening. No one here is really arguing single events as this one is the prime evidence, although that is what you try to make it look like. If you have noticed Peter is posting a lot of events, record this and record that, and that is the idea we are trying to get across, this is the summed up evidence of climate change from global warming.

      • omnologos Says:

        I understand your point John and perhaps there is something about it – however without systematic (scientific) analyses it’s all just a collection of anecdotes. I feel our host understands that, and thus adds additional drama by hinting that rare but not unprecedented phenomena be “not normal”.

        Unfortunately such a stance weakens the argument as all knowledgeable experts in the field know that eg a tornado where there is snow on the ground is very rare, but can happen, has happened and will happen (especially in years with plenty of snow far South).

        The global warming argument will be much stronger when its proponents won’t even feel the need to dramatize it.

        • Well, I partially agree there is no reason to dramatize anything in the discussion, although I am convinced the window of opportunity is closing fairly rapidly. So any reporting on AGW will take all forms of shapes in order to get into consciousness of people. After all, the purpose of this is not in aftermath to say “I told you so” – but rather recognize that this is about risk management choices we need to make now.

          I also believe its more fruitful to discuss our options, although if it stops at massive nuclear power construction in order to replace all fossil fuel use 1:1, then I believe we aren’t looking at the full set of possibilities. It might be that we need to get our act together and change some fundamental parts of society, although if its possible within the bounds of free market, the better, as that is the option that takes the least effort. But free will isn’t working now unless governments give a little incentive for change.

          As I have mentioned on a number of occasions, this problem is so heavily rooted into the veins of capitalism that redirecting those blood vessels is going to take a bit of effort and political will. Considering how incredible slow past governments have been and indeed the “noise of balanced science”, there really is no wonder why an increasingly loud message is voiced these days. A major problem is also that democracy in its current form does not represent the people but increasingly the rich and powerful who can afford lobbying or downright smearing of politicians. When the rules allow you to bring your own aces into the game, the outcome is really only predictable in who wins it. If we at least can acknowledge that democracy gets to play on fair terms, then perhaps we have a chance.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        JCL, Just as you and other rational people who visit Crock do, I too constantly look at the “big picture” and reach tentative conclusions that I will modify when new evidence is presented. Too much evidence is piling up that leads me to think things are likely to get much worse re: climate change sooner than we anticipated.

        On the other hand, we have people like Omknowsonlyonesong, who starts out with his preconceived denialist bias and industriously seeks out any kind of horsepucky that will support it. He suffers from confirmation bias, ignorance, inadequate intelligence, a meager knowledge base, and several personality deficiencies. It is even possible that he suffers mainly from the last of those—that he really isn’t a denier as much as he is an attention seeker.

        I’m not sure whether we or he demonstrate more “Einsteinian Insanity”, however. We keep beating on him and expect him to “improve”, and he keeps singing his one-note song and expecting someone (anyone) to sing along.

  8. omnologos Says:

    “Ask Cantore” on tornadoes in the snow

    Video is undated apart from having been posted in September 2009.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: