List Of DNC Speakers Grows

The Rocky is keeping track of who will speak, when, and on what topic as the convention moves through daily "themes."

The new additions?

The Goreacle, Jimmy Carter, and the Reverend Jesse Jackson.

Yay.

Climate Change Blasphemy Must Be Prosecuted Says NASA Scientist

It always amazes me to see how people view the legal system. Dr. James Hansen, vaguely referred to by The Guardian as one of the world's leading climate scientists (presumably due to the fact that he becomes hysterical more swiftly than the others), now thinks we should prosecute oil company executives for, "high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming."

Last time I checked, expressing doubt as to any theory, and then trying to disprove that theory, was part of the scientific method--not a violation of the criminal code. But never mind that, we have important criminal accusations to consider.

So, what are crimes against humanity and nature anyway? Article 7 § 1 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines crimes against humanity as:

any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

(a) Murder;

(b) Extermination;

(c) Enslavement;

(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

(f) Torture;

(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

(i) Enforced disappearance of persons;

(j) The crime of apartheid;

(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

Strangely, it says nothing about climate at all. Even if it did, Global Warming might be widespread, but could hardly be called a systematic attack upon any civilian population by oil company executives from the lawful operation of their businesses.

That leaves crimes against nature. Crimes against nature are not international crimes at all. They are generally part of state law. They forbid things like masturbation, oral sex, and sodomy. After the Supreme Court’s opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), most of the so called crimes against nature are unconstitutional as they violate our fundamental right to privacy. Of course, bestiality and necrophilia are both still forbidden, but Global Warming just does not seem to fit into this category does it? Then again, perhaps it does.

It seems the oil companies have violated neither international nor domestic law with their pernicious doubts about Global Warming. Of course, this is not the real problem here. The particular criminal charge does not matter so long as we can find one that will work to silence these doubters once and for all.

Generally speaking, true scientists want a lot of doubt expressed about their theories. They want the whole scientific community to have a go at them, and, if they still stand up, undamaged, at the end of the day the whole world is likely to embrace them. Such is not the case with Global Warming, though. Almost any rational person can manage to find considerable holes in the Global Warming theories. A scientist would say this means it requires more research and study.

Dr. Hansen and his ilk, however, remind us that this is about more than just science or law: it is about moral goodness. More research and more study takes time. Persuading lawmakers to act takes even longer. But we know what is evil now. Global Warming is evil. Those who doubt it are evil. There are many of them out there—doubting—and they are getting away with it!

There was once a time when our legal system would have accommodated such thinking. Indeed, both Church and State tried for a long while to prosecute irritating “doubters” for insufficient belief. Back then, though, we did not use those words. Instead, we used words like Inquisition, heretics, and blasphemy. The system had a splendid effect upon morality, but apparently science lagged a bit. We called that time the Dark Ages. Ironically, today, any government that tried to manage belief in such a way would be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. See supra, Article 7 § 1(h).

Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Carbon Belch Day--June 12

We'll see if this carbon belch "holiday" will be better observed than the washout of "Earth Hour" back on March 31:

Conservative grassroots group Grassfire.org wants people to waste as much energy as possible on June 12 by "hosting a barbecue, going for a drive, watching television, leaving a few lights on, or even smoking a few cigars."

The point: the group wants to "help Americans break free from the 'carbon footprint guilt' being imposed by Climate Alarmists."

CSU's Hurricane Forecaster And Climate Change Skeptic Dr. William Gray Faces Cold Shoulder For Global Warming Comments

**Update--Gray and CSU dispute original story:

Gray, who is in Florida this week, spoke with 9NEWS over the phone.

He said he was "very sorry and embarrassed" about the news saying, "CSU continues to support me."

In response to his comment within the memo, Gray said, "(My stance on global warming) could have been a factor in the talks, but I don't know."

He added, "CSU has never come out to say I should restrict my views on global warming… I have absolutely no complaints at CSU."

Aside from reporting that CSU may pull support from Gray, the national cable news network, Fox News, also wrote on its Web site, "Hurricane expert may lose job over climate views."

Gray and Woods both said there was never even a whisper about that.

"There has been no change to my status at CSU," Gray said.

---

Via Drudge:

By pioneering the science of seasonal hurricane forecasting and teaching 70 graduate students who now populate the National Hurricane Center and other research outposts, William Gray turned a city far from the stormy seas into a hurricane research mecca.

But now the institution in Fort Collins, Colo., where he has worked for nearly half a century, has told Gray it may end its support of his seasonal forecasting.

As he enters his 25th year of predicting hurricane season activity, Colorado State University officials say handling media inquiries related to Gray's forecasting requires too much time and detracts from efforts to promote other professors' work.

But Gray, a highly visible and sometimes acerbic skeptic of climate change, says that's a "flimsy excuse" for the real motivation — a desire to push him aside because of his global warming criticism.

Among other comments, Gray has said global warming scientists are "brainwashing our children."

Now an emeritus professor, Gray declined to comment on the university's possible termination of promotional support.

But a memo he wrote last year, after CSU officials informed him that media relations would no longer promote his forecasts after 2008, reveals his views:

"This is obviously a flimsy excuse and seems to me to be a cover for the Department's capitulation to the desires of some (in their own interest) who want to reign (sic) in my global warming and global warming-hurricane criticisms," Gray wrote to Dick Johnson, head of CSU's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, and others.

As Roger Fraley says, "tow the global warming line . . . or else!"

Global Warming--Command And Control Or Technological Approach?

Sen. James Inhofe lays out the economic stakes of a planned cap-and-trade scheme that would only exacerbate current economic downturns by crippling the American economy--and offers in its stead a free market, technology approach that would likely prove immensely more successful in its state goal of cleaning the environment while also keeping the economy strong:

The United States Senate will soon begin to debate a global warming cap-and-trade bill that, if passed, would impose severe economic constraints on American families and American workers for no environmental gain. We have had this debate before, starting with the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol in 1998, then again in 2003, and again in 2005. Each time, these cap-and-trade measures were defeated for two simple reasons: they did not include developing nations; and because of the significant economic impact on the American public. With the American economy facing troubles, now is certainly not the time to try this costly experiment.

What proponents of this bill fail to understand is that the American environmental success story has been built while growing our economy. Over the past three decades, Americans have proven that we can clean up our environment while expanding our population and vibrantly growing our economy. Democrats and their special interest allies have consistently taken the opposite approach and emphasized job-killing regulations and expanding the government’s power. The U.S. can follow a path of onerous government mandates or we can follow a path of developing and encouraging new technologies. A simple history lesson reveals that the technological approach is the only viable path forward as carbon cap-and-trade mandates are proving to be a failure throughout the developed world.
. . .
The Lieberman-Warner command and control path utterly fails in comparison to an approach that embraces and develops new technologies. A technology emphasis is the only politically and economically sustainable path forward. I have long advocated a technology approach that brings in the developing world nations such as China and India. My home state of Oklahoma demonstrates that tomorrow’s energy mix must include more natural gas, wind and geothermal, but it must also include oil, coal, and nuclear energy, which is the world's largest source of emission-free energy. This approach serves multiple purposes – it will reduce air pollution, expand our energy supply, increase trade, and, along with these other goals, reduce greenhouse gases. Developing and expanding domestic energy will translate into energy security and ensure stable sources of supply and well-paying jobs for Americans.

Will the United States Senate choose the economically harmful Lieberman-Warner bill or the new technology path? With five weeks to go until the debate, the question is largely up to you. If you believe, like I do that we must not impose more costly mandates on the American people, I urge you to engage in the debate and contact your Senator and make your voice heard.

SamSphere Denver Wrapup, Video

Previous SP coverage:
Liveblogging SamSphere Denver--Colorado Online Panel (includes video of Ross Kaminsky and Jeff Goldstein)
Liveblogging SamSphere Denver II--Colorado Online Part II

Ben DeGrow has a roundup, and Face the State has a recap.

Jon Caldara:


Trent Seibert:


Brad Jones:

Even "The People's Republic" Of Boulder, CO Can't Meet Kyoto Goals Using Heavy Carbon Taxation

"The bottom line is even if all the developed countries fully complied with the Kyoto Protocol, the effect would be minuscule. It's a completely negligible amount of global warming"--Kevin Doran, Center for Energy and Environmental Security at the University of Colorado

More evidence the moonbat plan to use carbon taxes to help reduce greenhouse gases in order to achieve the rather modest Kyoto goals (modest compared to all the new plans for "climate change" solutions) will fail across the country and present a financial boondoggle to boot--they can't even succeed in the Berkeley of the Rockies--Boulder, Colorado:

The way things are going, Boulder will only make it about halfway to its goal of cutting enough greenhouse gases to comply with the Kyoto Protocol, according to a memo released by the city staff Wednesday.

The Office of Environmental Affairs is requesting a 53 percent increase in funding, which would boost its budget from $875,177 to $1,343,133. Even if the City Council approves the increase, which would translate to a higher carbon tax, Boulder would still meet only 85 percent of its Kyoto goal.

"It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone," said Sarah Van Pelt, Boulder's environmental sustainability coordinator. "We knew we were just starting at the lowest tax rate and slowly phasing in all the programs."

When voters approved the Climate Action Plan tax in 2006, they actually gave the OK to a range of possible taxes. Now, electricity users are taxed at the lowest level, and the new proposal would up the taxes to about midway through the possible range. Van Pelt said it has always been part of the plan to increase taxes as time went on. Residential users now pay an average of $13 extra a year in carbon taxes. The new proposal would increase the average to $19.

The Kyoto Protocol calls for greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced to 7 percent below 1990 levels. Locally, that means reducing emissions, from 1.9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide -- the amount Boulder residents were responsible for in 2006 -- to just under 1.5 million metric tons by 2012.

Well, 85% isn't too far off, so how will they get there? They could always deploy "greenshirt" youth to, um, "encourage" their neighbors to switch their lights off . . .

So far, the city's approach to emission reduction has relied heavily on marketing and subsidies -- most of which are offered in conjunction with Xcel Energy or Boulder County -- to convince people to take voluntary actions, including retrofitting their homes, driving less and buying wind-power offsets. The Office of Environmental Affairs would also dump the majority of new money into reducing greenhouse gases through energy efficiency.

"I feel like it's very possible that the community can meet the Kyoto target," Van Pelt said. "We just have to decide to do it."

To meet the Kyoto Protocol, city staffers project that they will have to come back to the City Council and request more money in the near future.

Of course--more money!

But change by the tried-and-true "incremental" approach won't even have much of an effect anyway, as the Kyoto Protocols "don't go far enough":

Even 100 percent compliance with the Kyoto Protocol doesn't go far in the battle against climate change, according to some researchers.

"The bottom line is even if all the developed countries fully complied with the Kyoto Protocol, the effect would be minuscule," said Kevin Doran, who works with the Center for Energy and Environmental Security at the University of Colorado. "It's a completely negligible amount of global warming."

Doran said Boulder isn't alone, and he estimates that most of the 800 cities that have signed on to meet the Kyoto demands will fall short.

"A lot of them rely on activities and reductions that are outside of their zone of influence," he said.

The real "bottom line" won't be the negligible effect these measures will have, but the tremendous costs incurred trying to achieve them.

But what's a global warming/climate change article without a scientist--I mean, where's the consensus . . .

Roger Pielke Jr., who works for CU's Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, wasn't surprised that Boulder is challenged to meet the Kyoto Protocol. He published an article in the journal Nature this week that says it will be more difficult to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than society has been led to believe.

"This is a perfect example of the challenge," Pielke wrote in an e-mail from the United Kingdom. "Even with the best of intentions and strong political support, a tiny step like meeting Kyoto proves extremely challenging for Boulder under current conditions. ... If Boulder can't meet the very small step of Kyoto, why would anyone think that the world can do something much, much more difficult?"

Takeaways?

More action, now! 'Cause if Boulder can't do it, no one can!

Wait, that isn't right. But it's the gesture that counts.

MSM Columnist Praises Earth Hour Youth Going Door-To-Door In Denver To Enforce Lights Out

Yes, I'm serious--brainwashed elementary school kids pounded the pavement on behalf of Earth Hour, encouraging guilting harassing their nighbors into darkness by insisting that lights be switched off in their neighborhood (h/t Drunkablog, who has included several "photos" purported to be the children in question):

This column came knocking at 8:10 p.m. Saturday.

"It's Earth Hour," said one of a gaggle of seven young neighbors holding candles on our front porch.

"Why are your lights on?" asked another, eyebrows furrowed, glaring at me with 120 watts of disappointment.

These were the children of the 500 block of High Street, a plucky bunch of grade-schoolers whose games and laughter grace our neighborhood even more than the tall trees.
. . .
The troupe went global Saturday.

When the clocks struck 8:00, they mobilized to save the planet by knocking loudly on neighbors' doors with a metal key — a technique one of the older boys learned selling tins of caramel corn for Boy Scouts.
. . .
Most of our neighbors' homes also darkened, one by one, after visits from the little organizers.

Ah the young--they grow up so fascist fast.

The "greenshirts" were just doing their part to save the planet:

"We need to save all the juice in the earth so there will be some left when we're old," said 8-year-old Dara Pasquino.

"Just this hour of darkness is saving, like, trillions and trillions of gallons," added her brother, Dante, 10.

Nine-year-old Daniel Scher expounded on the need to "reduce, reuse and recycle" and "plan for sustainability."

"We're teaching grown-ups not to be wasters," added Juliana Pfeifer, 6. "Besides, firelight makes you sing songs and tell stories. Candles make everything more wonderful."

By 10 p.m. — well past their bedtimes — the tired firebrands smiled when they realized most of the block was still dark even after Earth Hour was history.

They had changed their world, at least for a few hours.

Then, at the prodding of their parents, the kids of High Street headed home to bed, skipping into the balmy night, triumphant in the darkness.

Triumphant in their moonbattery at the age of SIX.

Of course the lefty Post columnist sees nothing wrong with this situation. The children were accompanied by their parents after all, no doubt encouraging them to continue their efforts, and perhaps verbally scolding those on the block who were non-compliant.

These kids have been doubly abused--through the indoctrination they have clearly received from their parents and most likely also from their schools, and because they have been taught that argument, debate, and persuasion are to be avoided in favor of "collective action," guilt, and groupthink. Rather than using logic, they have been taught to "feel" their way through the situation.

They have certainly not been exposed to the other side of the debate, and that is a shame.

But as is usual for the left, feeling and doing outweigh thinking.

"Earth Hour" Futility, Google Hypocrisy Revealed

**Update--Earth Hour Denver timelapse and video:


As you can tell, not much was turned off. About the only participants in Denver were the Hard Rock Cafe and the Denver Convention and Performing Arts Center:

The Hard Rock dimmed lights inside and out. It was joined by the Virgin Megastore and Lucky Strike Lanes, which turned off their huge neon signs. Meanwhile, the marquee of the nearby Paramount Theater shone bright.

The Paramount wasn't alone, as businesses up and down the mall, both big and small, kept lights blazing, operating in the dark when it came to Earth Hour.

However, nonessential lights were turned off in the City and County Building, the Wellington Webb Municipal Building and the Denver Performing Arts Complex.

And at the Northfield Stapleton shopping center, some restaurants planned to serve customers by candlelight.
. . .
Power savings in the Denver area were expected to be modest. Xcel Energy said that lighting accounts for about 7 percent of home energy use, so that savings from people turning off lights will be only a portion of 7 percent, depending on how many households participate.

That'll stave off climate change. But it's the gesture that counts, right?

As I read on another blog (and can't remember where), we each voluntarily perform "Earth Hour" every night--by going to bed and turning off the lights and electronics inside the house.

This pathetically empty symbolic gesture achieves nothing more than assuaging global warmenist guilt. If it were really that important, these measures would become mandatory. How long is it before "Earth Hour" observations become energy controls, with fines and punishment for profligate consumers (except the limousine liberals, of course)?

Wait. I shouldn't be giving them any ideas . . .

---

"We applaud the spirit of the idea, but our own analysis as well as that of others shows that making the Google homepage black will not reduce energy consumption. To the contrary, on flat-panel monitors (already estimated to be 75% of the market), displaying black may actually increase energy usage. Detailed results from a new study confirm this"--Google, on turning its screen black, which it is doing once again for "Earth Hour"

Earth Hour's site is currently running slowly, no doubt due to traffic:



Moonbattery highlights Google's hypocrisy and black-screen futility--the color change saves no energy, as Google itself admits:

Reducing climate change by saving energy is an important effort we should all join, and that's why we're very glad to see the innovative thinking going into a variety of solutions. One idea, suggested by the site called "Blackle" (which is not related to Google, by the way, though the site does use our custom search engine), is to reduce energy used by monitors by providing search with a black background. We applaud the spirit of the idea, but our own analysis as well as that of others shows that making the Google homepage black will not reduce energy consumption. To the contrary, on flat-panel monitors (already estimated to be 75% of the market), displaying black may actually increase energy usage. Detailed results from a new study confirm this.

The Drunkablog has a fun bunch of links to Tim Blair (from down under, who is tracking the event around the world), who is combatting "Earth Hour" moonbattery with the "Hour of Power", and a roundup of local MSM cheerleading coverage.

Ed Morrissey has much more on Google's hypocrisy at Hot Air.

Earth Hour's "Ten Things to do in the Dark" (annotated):

Host a Green Party

Get your friends together for an Earth Hour eco-party. Fire up the flashlights and battery lanterns, serve organic food, avoid the disposable utensils, use natural décor (like flowers and hanging plants) and have a friend provide acoustic music. Talk to your guests about how you’re each reducing your environmental footprint and share ideas and solutions for saving more energy, money and carbon dioxide.
--Yes, have all of your friends DRIVE to your EH eco-party. Be sure to have them charge those batteries ahead of time--you are using rechargeables, aren't you?

Give Yourself an Energy Makeover

Use Earth Hour to make your home more energy efficient: Replace your old light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs; install power strips (so you can turn computers and electronics on and off more easily); and change your air conditioner filters. Or go one step farther and install one new energy-efficient item, like an EnergyStar qualified DVD player. And on Monday, call your local utility and sign up for green power—like wind, hydro or solar.
--Replace incandescents with CFLs--and don't worry about all that harmful mercury. Make sure to find the most expensive alternative source of energy--you are committed, aren't you?

Go Green with Your Kids

Earth Hour is a perfect time to talk to your kids about the environment and why we need to protect our planet from the dangers of climate change. Check out books on the environment from the library and read by flashlight, or head into the yard and have a night picnic. Or how about a night of board games? There are even Earth Hour kids’ activities you can download at www.earthhour.org.
--Indoctrinate the future polluters Educate your kids, and make sure they properly fear climate change. Al Gore says so.

Do a Recyclables Scavenger Hunt

Get your flashlights and scour your cabinets and shelves for cans, bottles and cardboard (like cereal boxes) that you don't normally recycle. Make a list of all the non-recyclable containers you’re using now (like plastic shopping bags and butter tubs), and figure out ways to reduce your consumption of items that end up in landfills. One easy tip: get reusable grocery bags...and reuse them!
--Recycle, recycle, recycle--make it your mantra! Find more expensive, organic alternatives for all of your consumption. Or ELSE.

Green That Workspace!

Working the night shift? Even if you can’t turn off all the lights at work, look around and see what you can unplug, turn down or use less of (like consuming less paper by printing double-sided). Every day millions of computer screens and speakers are left on overnight—shut ‘em off! And talk to your coworkers about what they can do to help make a difference too.
--Conduct surveillance on your wastrel colleagues and report them immediately! You can also afford to strain your eyes by turning off all those annoying lights.

Involve Your Local Leaders

If your city or town isn't already hosting an Earth Hour event, ask your local government to set up a community "green" discussion in a public building from 8 to 9 p.m. on March 29. Help organize attendance by reaching out to local environmental and community groups, and come prepared to ask your leaders what they’re doing to make your city greener.
--Enforce your views on your neighbors by insisting local government bend to your every demand. Make sure to eliminate all dissent. Shame those who dare to ask questions.

Clean Up Your Neighborhood

Grab a flashlight and take a long walk through your neighborhood, picking up trash and recyclables as you go. It's a great chance to do some stargazing too!
--Make sure to do it in the dark, so that picking up trash can turn into a game of "name that trash!"

Unplug and Chill Out

Most of our daily activities—like watching TV, shopping online and texting friends—require loads of electricity, but do we really need to do so much stuff all the time? Take one hour for yourself to just chill...turn off the screens, put down the handheld devices and just take some "you" time to reflect, read or talk to your family. After all, why do more when you can do less?
--Yes, read in the dark. It's easy if you try. Or better yet, sleep. Recreate the conditions of bedtime, when you normally turn off all the lights/appliances/electronics . . . um, yeah, basically do what you do EVERY night. That'll make it EXTRA symbolic.

Take Your Temperature

Your thermostat and your refrigerator are responsible for a huge portion of your carbon footprint. If you lower your thermostat by just 2 degrees and set your fridge to 37° F. and the freezer at 0° F., you'll make a big difference.
--Doable. It is Spring or Fall around the globe, and so you won't exactly freeze or swelter.

Make a Pledge for the Planet

Earth Hour shouldn't end at 9:01 pm—it's a chance to take a first step toward lowering your overall impact on the environment. So use part of that hour to make a personal pledge to do more—recycle, drive less often, remember to turn off or unplug electronics, and beyond. The only way we're going to stabilize our climate is if we make real changes in our everyday lives. That change begins with Earth Hour, and ends with a healthy planet.
--Rather than waste your time on symbolic gestures that accomplish nothing but make you feel really, really good about yourself, make a plan to actually conserve in a meaningful, sustainable way. We don't actually want you to return to the Stone Age, now, do we?

The Warm, Dry Winter That Never Arrived--Colorado's Second Wettest Winter Ever, Scientists Baffled

Winter precipitation was much above average from the Midwest to parts of the West, notably Kansas, Colorado and Utah. Although moderate-to-strong La Niña conditions were present in the equatorial Pacific the winter was unique for the above average rain and snowfall in the Southwest, where La Niña typically brings drier-than-average conditions--NOAA

Nothing typical about the latest regional and statewide (Colorado) snowpack levels:




From The Pueblo Chieftain:

It appears the warm, dry winter never arrived.

A warm, dry spring still is being forecast by the Climate Prediction Center of the National Weather Service, but that shouldn’t hamper the valley’s water supply, as reservoir storage continues to increase, streams run high and water managers make room for an expected flood of imported water.

Snowpack in the Arkansas Basin is at record levels through mid-March, with several feet of snow with high water content at nearly all sites. Snowpack was at 159 percent of average in the basin as of Friday, and running ahead of any previously recorded years. Already, snowpack is far above the maximum average accumulation as well.

Conditions were similar in the San Luis Valley, where officials are concerned about spring flooding and snowpack is rated at 154 percent of average.

Statewide, snowpack was 126 percent of average.

So, um, how could this be?

From NOAA:

Winter precipitation was much above average from the Midwest to parts of the West, notably Kansas, Colorado and Utah. Although moderate-to-strong La Niña conditions were present in the equatorial Pacific the winter was unique for the above average rain and snowfall in the Southwest, where La Niña typically brings drier-than-average conditions.

During January alone, 170 inches of snow fell at the Alta ski area near Salt Lake City, Utah, more than twice the normal amount for the month, eclipsing the previous record of 168 inches that fell in 1967. At the end of February, seasonal precipitation for the 2008 Water Year, which began on October 1, 2007, was well above average over much of the West.

Mountain snowpack exceeded 150 percent of average in large parts of Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Oregon at the end of February. Spring run-off from the above average snowpack in the West is expected to be beneficial in drought plagued areas.
Record February precipitation in the Northeast helped make the winter the fifth wettest on record for the region. New York had its wettest winter, while Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Vermont, and Colorado to the West, had their second wettest.

Snowfall was above normal in northern New England, where some locations posted all-time record winter snow totals. Concord, N.H., received 100.1 inches, which was 22.1 inches above the previous record set during the winter of 1886-87. Burlington, Vt., received 103.2 inches, which was 6.3 inches above the previous record set during the winter of 1970-71.

Wait, there's more--Steamboat Springs hitting an all-time record for snowfall in a season before the middle of March, and more on Colorado's impressive snowpack.

How impressive? Second. Wettest. Winter. Ever.

But how do record precipiation figures look visually?

Glad you asked:


Way, way above average in more than half the states


Not especially toasty anywhere this winter

From early February, when "climate experts" admitted they were way, way off base:

Dry-winter forecasts were flat wrong this year for much of Colorado and the Southwest, and weather experts say they're struggling to understand why the snow just keeps falling.

Some forecasters blame climate change, and others point to the simple vicissitudes of weather. Regardless, almost everyone called for a dry-to-normal winter in Colorado and the Southwest — but today, the state's mountains are piled so thick with snow that state reservoirs could fill and floods could be widespread this spring.

"The polar jet stream has been on steroids. We don't understand this. It's pushing our limits, and it's humbling," said Klaus Wolter, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Wolter, however, remained defiant--"I'm sticking with my forecast, except that I acknowledge I have some egg on my face."

Try an omelette.

Gateway Pundit has maintained an extensive and excellent archive of similar global cold weather-related phenomena in a series aptly titled--"Brrrr!"

Thursday Morning Linkage

First the bias:

After years of Colorado's MSM going on and on about the lingering effects of the drought from 2002, Colorado finally has a year where each basin is above 100%, and the overall snowpack is approximately 130% of the 30 year average. The story? The snow is going to melt (I know, shocking), and that means spring flooding! Nothing like a little MSM sensationalism.

---

Or perhaps the state's economy. The headline? "Colorado unemployment inches up to 4.2 percent in January." The story? Much, much different. The numbers:

Colorado's unemployment rate rose two-tenths of a percentage point to 4.2 percent in January as the labor market weakened slightly, state labor officials said Tuesday.

The number of Coloradans with jobs rose by 14,500 while the number of unemployed rose by 7,100, the state Department of Labor and Employment said. [a net gain of 7,400 jobs]

Total employment in January was 74,000 higher than a year earlier, but about 116,000 couldn't find work, up from about 104,000 a year ago.

"Colorado continues to display modest employment gains in the face of a national economy seemingly on the verge of contraction," said Don Mares, the department director.

The spin is clear--the rest of the country as a whole is not fairing as well, but Colorado is showing only "modest" gains. How about resiliency or, you know, strength?

But that isn't the whole story. Seems the estimated unemployment increases of the final four months of last year were nonexistent, and had to be revised:

The department also said its revised report on 2007 largely erased large increases in unemployment originally reported late last year.

After revision, adjusted unemployment rates stayed essentially flat the final four months of the year.

The department originally reported increases of one-tenth of a percentage point in September and four-tenths in both November and December.

The October rate had showed a decline of two-tenths of a percentage point.

Mares said the state's major labor indicators were mostly positive in 2007, with an average annual jobless rate of 3.8 percent, down from 4.3 percent in 2006.

The 2007 average was the lowest since 2.7 percent in 2000.

Total employment grew by 65,700 last year while the average number of unemployed residents dropped by 11,600.

Compared to the downturn a few years ago following the tech bust and post 9/11 effects, and considering the current oil, currency, and stock market uncertainty, Colorado looks to be doing quite well. Not excellent, but certainly better than a story leading with the unemployment rise (which could also be revised) or a "mostly positive, modest" description.

---

This one's a few days old, but it looks like the state's greenies and global warmenists are enjoying their time in the sun with Colorado's Democratic controlled House, Senate, and Governorship:

These are happy times for the environmental movement under the dome.

As the legislative session begins its second half this week, every one of the the dozen bills the groups have identified this year as priorities is still on the road to passing.

The bills touch areas of state policy from water use to power generation to wildlife protection. Two are awaiting the signature of the governor, who, by the way, doesn't seem to go a day without mentioning the "new energy economy." That phrase was at least partially created by the environmental community.

Both chambers of the legislature also have "pro-conservation majorities," as the environmentalists put it.

"There are many Democratic constituencies that have influence under the dome," said political analyst Eric Sondermann. "But my perception is that the environmental constituency is first among equals."

Nothing like a little payback from Gov. Ritter.

Has Colorado gone green, imbibing from Al Gore's global warming climate change kool-aid sippy-cup:

Environmental lobbyists say that, after years of getting their bills killed in Republican legislatures, their ideas have gained wider appeal in a world of rising gas prices and greater acknowledgment of climate change. They credit voters for bringing to power the current crop of conservation-minded lawmakers — mostly Democrats but also several environment-friendly Republicans — who in turn have looked favorably upon the environmental agenda.

"It really has been a pretty incredible shift," said Carrie Doyle, the executive director of Colorado Conservation Voters. "I think what's leading this shift are voters' concerns."

Environmental leaders say they also have become more politically skilled in recent years. They work to build coalitions more often, with farmers, ranchers, hunters, fishermen, local elected officials, business owners — anybody who might have an interest in land or water.

They shoot more for incremental change. And they are more willing to compromise on issues to see at least part of their goals enacted.

Incremental change? Translation--back door, Trojan horse approach. Death by a 1000 cuts. Same thing.

There is a cost to all this environmental correctness, as Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma, points out, "All of us want to protect the air and the water and the land," Gardner said. "We just don't want to sell Coloradans down the river to get there."

Come on Rep. Gardner. The science is settled. Don't be a big business shilling climate change heretic!

---

---

In other news:

In another follow-up to last December's church shootings, Colorado Springs Police release a 450 page report that includes Matthew Murray's angry letter to God.

---

Democrat State Sen. Chris Romer's I-70 plan, updated with citizen input includes tolls, trucking restrictions, lane reversal, and trip preregistration. Yep, that'll work. Apparently, the bill is not being so well-received, even by members of his own party.

New Evidence Threatens MSM's "Cold Equals Weather, Heat Equals Climate" Rhetoric

Via Newsbusters:

One of the truly hysterical aspects of media's obvious discomforture are the press proclamations that seasonal temperatures are not an indicator of climate trends.

Comically, this is exactly what climate realists counter every time press representatives point to a heatwave or a hurricane as proof of anthropogenic global warming.

The impetus for this "weather is not climate" restatement is an EPW blog entry covered here last week.

Earlier "consensus" was that Colorado would suffer the effects of global warming climate change in the form of less snow (more rain due to warmer temperatures) and less precipitation overall (drought).

Now, record or near-record snowfall is simply a function of global warming climate change, because more heat means more moisture and therefore, more snow.

Climate Change Skeptics Get The NY Times Treatment

When it is blazing hot in the summer and the Arctic ice melts, or when Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans in 2005--that is evidence of global warming, a specifically anthropogenic form of climate change.

When it is abnormally cold, with record snows in the Northern Hemisphere? Just "good old-fashioned" weather, not climate change.

And they wonder why skeptics question the not-so-unified "consensus":

The world has seen some extraordinary winter conditions in both hemispheres over the past year: snow in Johannesburg last June and in Baghdad in January, Arctic sea ice returning with a vengeance after a record retreat last summer, paralyzing blizzards in China, and a sharp drop in the globe’s average temperature.

It is no wonder that some scientists, opinion writers, political operatives and other people who challenge warnings about dangerous human-caused global warming have jumped on this as a teachable moment.

“Earth’s ‘Fever’ Breaks: Global COOLING Currently Under Way,” read a blog post and news release on Wednesday from Marc Morano, the communications director for the Republican minority on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

So what is happening?

According to a host of climate experts, including some who question the extent and risks of global warming, it is mostly good old-fashioned weather, along with a cold kick from the tropical Pacific Ocean, which is in its La Niña phase for a few more months, a year after it was in the opposite warm El Niño pattern.

What about the sun?

If anything else is afoot — like some cooling related to sunspot cycles or slow shifts in ocean and atmospheric patterns that can influence temperatures — an array of scientists who have staked out differing positions on the overall threat from global warming agree that there is no way to pinpoint whether such a new force is at work.

Many scientists also say that the cool spell in no way undermines the enormous body of evidence pointing to a warming world with disrupted weather patterns, less ice and rising seas should heat-trapping greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels and forests continue to accumulate in the air.

“The current downturn is not very unusual,” said Carl Mears, a scientist at Remote Sensing Systems, a private research group in Santa Rosa, Calif., that has been using satellite data to track global temperature and whose findings have been held out as reliable by a variety of climate experts. He pointed to similar drops in 1988, 1991-92, and 1998, but with a long-term warming trend clear nonetheless.

“Temperatures are very likely to recover after the La Niña event is over,” he said.

They'd better, or things are gonna really get inconvenient for Al Gore's minions.

"Skeptics’ last stand"?

Michael E. Schlesinger, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, said that any focus on the last few months or years as evidence undermining the established theory that accumulating greenhouse gases are making the world warmer was, at best, a waste of time and, at worst, a harmful distraction.

Discerning a human influence on climate, he said, “involves finding a signal in a noisy background.” He added, “The only way to do this within our noisy climate system is to average over a sufficient number of years that the noise is greatly diminished, thereby revealing the signal. This means that one cannot look at any single year and know whether what one is seeing is the signal or the noise or both the signal and the noise.”

The shifts in the extent and thickness of sea ice in the Arctic (where ice has retreated significantly in recent summers) and Antarctic (where the area of floating sea ice has grown lately) are similarly hard to attribute to particular influences.

Doesn't difficulty in attributing influence mean there is some doubt as to the exact cause--that there may actually be a combination of effects from different sources, not just human-made greenhouse gases?

It seems the only "noise" right now is the sound of panic from global warming alarmists who can't believe that "respondents who are better-informed about global warming 'both feel less personally responsible for global warming, and also show less concern for global warming.'"

Some scientists remain undaunted, criticizing the precise same "piecemeal" tactic employed by global warming activists like Al Gore in their attempt to dismiss dissent:

“Climate skeptics typically take a few small pieces of the puzzle to debunk global warming, and ignore the whole picture that the larger science community sees by looking at all the pieces,” said Ignatius G. Rigor, a climate scientist at the Polar Science Center of the University of Washington in Seattle.

It appears the climate change debate--like the climate itself--is going through a "cycle", and right now the skeptics are beginning to chip away at the already crumbling scientific "consensus".

Recent News Indicates Global Cooling Currently Under Way

From the fellows over at the EPW blog, "A sampling of recent articles detailing the inconvenient reality of temperature trends around the planet."

An additional roundup of the global cooling/climate change.

Study: Hurricanes No Worse Today Than In The Past Says Leading Climate Scientist

"The study has implications for scientists who research whether or not climate change is responsible for increasing the frequency and severity of hurricanes. Pielke suggests that even if climate change does intensify hurricanes, the added damages caused by global warming are relatively insignificant. If people want to see less damage, they need to move away from the coasts, he said."--Roger Pielke Jr., a scientist with CU’s Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences

Not stronger. The reason for more damage? More human inhabitants in vulnerable areas:

If the same hurricane that plowed into Miami in 1926 were to swamp south Florida's coast today, it would cause around $150 billion worth of damage -- dwarfing the $80 billion in losses caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 -- according to new research by a professor at the University of Colorado.

The study, published this month in the journal Natural Hazards Review, extrapolated how much damage historic hurricanes would cause given today's denser and wealthier coastal populations. All of the storms that made landfall between 1900 and 2005 were studied.

“We took 2005 population and buildings and wealth and we said, ‘If every hurricane system occurred with that amount of development, what sort of damages would we see?’” said Roger Pielke Jr., a scientist with CU’s Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences.

Pielke and his team found that hurricanes today are not more damaging than hurricanes a century ago. Instead, the main factor causing increased losses from hurricanes is the coastal development pattern.

“It’s not a wise or unwise decision to build on the coast,” Pielke said. “But I would like to see people fully appreciate the risks of their actions and consider who will be bearing the costs.”

The study has implications for scientists who research whether or not climate change is responsible for increasing the frequency and severity of hurricanes. Pielke suggests that even if climate change does intensify hurricanes, the added damages caused by global warming are relatively insignificant. If people want to see less damage, they need to move away from the coasts, he said.

Logic. Lost on moonbats in the globalwarmenist religion. One of the central tenets of the Al Gore conspiracy theory is that human activity exacerbates weather events--especially in the most destructive category of hurricanes.

Unfortunately for the global warming industry, there are scientists more interested in discovering what is actually happening to the Earth's climate--both causes and effects--than belonging to any mythical "consensus".

Despite Global Warming, North America Has Most Snow Cover Since 1966

And not just here, but around the Northern Hemisphere:

Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.

The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January "was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average."

China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.

There have been so many snow and ice storms in Ontario and Quebec in the past two months that the real estate market has felt the pinch as home buyers have stayed home rather than venturing out looking for new houses.

In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, smashing the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto, pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.

More scientists are doubting that "consensus" Al Gore and other global warmongers have repeatedly cited as "evidence" of anthropogenic climate change:

And it's not just anecdotal evidence that is piling up against the climate-change dogma.

According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona -- two prominent climate modellers -- the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.
. . .
Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as "a drop in the bucket." Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to "stock up on fur coats."

He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.

The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased.

Gateway Pundit has been relentless in covering the brutal 2007-2008 winter across the globe, with a roundup of "climate change" of the cooler kind.

Colorado's impressive snowpack totals continue to befuddle the "experts" who predicted a dry winter.

Related: measuring "the greenness of politicians by how many federal laws they impose on the American people".

Weekend Blog Wrapup

Here are some random links that I never got around to blogging this past week (lots of school and a few new projects)--

---

22-year-old human smuggler arrested for 15th time, having already been deported 14 times prior to his latest arrest in Colorado:

Two illegal immigrants were arrested for human smuggling in Eagle today. One of the men has been deported 14 times for human smuggling prior to today's arrest. He is 22 years old.

At 8:21am a deputy pulled over a silver Chevy Venture van in the eastbound lane of I-70 for a license plate violation. The deputy discovered 13 illegal immigrants inside the vehicle.

The driver said he planned on delivering the twelve adult males in various locations that included Denver, Iowa, and Georgia.

Omar Alaverez-Mecedo, age 22, was arrested and charged with Human Smuggling, a class three felony, and operating a vehicle without a valid driver's license, a class two misdemeanor.

In the course of the investigation it was discovered that "Omar Alaverez-Mecedo's" real name is Israel Robles-Gaytan. According to ICE, Robles-Gaytan had already been caught and deported fourteen times; he gave law enforcement officials a different name each time.

Slime.

---

Coming soon, courtesy of global warming moonbats, to a city (like Boulder) soon (h/t SondraK):

GLOBAL WARMING IS a planet-sized problem, so policy solutions tend to aim for the grandest possible scale. The signatories of the Kyoto Protocol have pledged to cut their greenhouse gas emissions at a national level, while laws in various countries and states seek to reform entire industries.

For individuals, the picture is very different. Environmentalism often boils down to small lifestyle choices, like turning down the thermostat and screwing in the squiggly light bulbs - gestures that can feel virtuous but futile. Some environmentalists even consider them counterproductive if they substitute for activism.

But a new wave of thinking suggests it may be better in the long run to address this global problem in a way that directly involves individuals. Several proposals generating buzz chiefly in the United Kingdom and Ireland operate on the notion that every individual has an equal stake in the atmosphere. The most provocative idea, personal carbon trading, would grant all residents a "carbon allowance," setting a limit on carbon dioxide emissions from their households and transportation. In the model of the industrial "cap and trade" system, guzzlers who exceeded their allowance would need to buy extra shares. People who conserved energy, meanwhile, could sell their leftover shares and ride their bikes all the way to the bank.

This is not just a fantasy floating around in the greenest reaches of the blogosphere. In 2006, the UK's environment secretary, David Miliband, endorsed the idea, and the British government has commissioned a study to explore the policy's feasibility.

Trading freedom for socialism.

---

The nutty professor unemployed hack from CU, Chief "Shitting Bull" Ward Churchill himself, has unexpectedly "pulled out" of his April 2 debate with Victor Davis Hanson--apparently reading the writing on the wall (h/t Drunkablog):

April 2, 2008: Boulder, Colorado

Debate canceled until we find another opponent. Ward Churchill unexpectedly pulled out.

If you can't stand the thought of missing out on the Churchill's outstanding pedagogical prowess and intellectual insights, this semester's three and a quarter hour long "classes" are still on (h/t Drunkablog).

Who Knew? Climate Change, Global Warming Brings Colder Winter

As Gateway Pundit points out in at least a dozen instances all around the globe, it's really, really cold--just about everywhere. Take a look at the Arctic ice caps:

NEW evidence has cast doubt on claims that the world’s ice-caps are melting, it emerged last night.

Satellite data shows that concerns over the levels of sea ice may have been premature.

It was feared that the polar caps were vanishing because of the effects of global warming.

But figures from the respected US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that almost all the “lost” ice has come back.

Ice levels which had shrunk from 13million sq km in January 2007 to just four million in October, are almost back to their original levels.

Figures show that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than is usual for the time of year.

The data flies in the face of many current thinkers and will be seized on by climate change sceptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.

A photograph of polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg has become one of the most enduring images in the campaign against climate change.

It was used by former US Vice President Al Gore during his Inconvenient Truth lectures about mankind’s impact on the world. But scientists say the northern hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades.

They add that snow cover across the area is at its greatest since 1966.

Arctic ice cover has not only recovered, but it is thicker as well.

Whoops!

Ben DeGrow has more, and cautions against falling into the global warming/climate change fearmongering trap that brings things like Bill Ritter's "climate change plan".

After all, the scientists can't be wrong.

Roger Fraley has an update on the Antarctic ice sheet, which apparently is doing quite well.

Winter Forecasts Wrong For Second Year Admit "Experts"

Blaming the failure of their predictions to match what actually has transpired on--wait for it--"global change":

Dry-winter forecasts were flat wrong this year for much of Colorado and the Southwest, and weather experts say they're struggling to understand why the snow just keeps falling.

Some forecasters blame climate change, and others point to the simple vicissitudes of weather. Regardless, almost everyone called for a dry-to-normal winter in Colorado and the Southwest — but today, the state's mountains are piled so thick with snow that state reservoirs could fill and floods could be widespread this spring.

"The polar jet stream has been on steroids. We don't understand this. It's pushing our limits, and it's humbling," said Klaus Wolter, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Whoops! So climate and weather conditions are 1) more difficult to predict, and 2) humans still haven't figured out a precise way of measuring or modeling the extremely complex systems that produce the droughts, floods, storms, etc. that we face each year.

Shocker.

Apparently, even historically predictable occurrences like El Niño and La Niña can still show a potentially wide range of variability in terms of outcome, as they did this year:

Wolter and NOAA both forecast a drier-than-average winter in most of Colorado. AccuWeather Inc. did the same, citing similar reasons: A La Niña weather system of cool, equatorial Pacific water had set up in the tropics last fall.

Generally, La Niña years bring dry and warm weather to Colorado in the fall and spring, and variable winters tend to be close to average.

La Niña winters have almost always brought droughtlike conditions to the Southwest, as the jet stream ferries storms farther north.

So, what the devil is causing the weather forecasters and climate "experts" to miss their predictions with an alarming rate? Why, "global change", of course!

Wolter said he's troubled that his and other long-range forecasts have been off two years in a row now.

Last year, experts predicted a wet year from Southern California across to Arizona and southern Colorado, because of an El Niño weather system of warmer Pacific water.

Instead, drought worsened in the Southwest, capped by a huge fire season in Southern California.

"So we have two years in a row here where the atmosphere does not behave as we expect," Wolter said. "Maybe global changes are pulling the rug out from underneath us. We may not know the answer for 10 years, . . . but one pet answer is that you should get more variability with global change."

This winter's forecasts were accurate in some areas of the country, Wolter and Reeves said: The Pacific Northwest has been slammed with precipitation, as predicted, and, even with snow expected overnight and today in Denver, it has been relatively dry along Colorado's Front Range.

You see, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then.

"Global change" is Wolter's "pet answer". Take that one to your boss--"Sorry, sir, it's that damned global change!"


Just some of the tons of "global change" that have fallen on Colorado this winter

Snow In Colorado Exceeds Early Season Forecast For Second Straight Year

"I'm sticking with my forecast, except that I acknowledge I have some egg on my face"--Klaus Wolter, meteorologist affiliated with the University of Colorado and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.


Klaus Wolter, egg on his face

More like completely defied the weather forecasters' and climatologists' prognostications that called for a dry, warm winter:

It wasn't supposed to be this way.

The National Weather Service's "probability forecast" called for a drier than normal winter in southwestern Colorado. But as meteorologist Aldis Strautins of the National Weather Service in Grand Junction explains, probability is not cast in stone.

"When you're talking about climate and probability forecasts, saying that the probability is a little higher that it's going to be drier doesn't mean it still couldn't be a wet year. That's what's happened so far. You have a better chance of drier weather, but it's still possible you can get these other events. And the season's not through."

Of course, this isn't the first time that seasonal projections failed to adequately describe what would happen. Just remember last season's blizzard, which came on the heels of a similar three-month projection that also called for dry weather and little precipitation.

What was the prediction last November (11-27-07 to be exact)?

Mountain snowpacks are thin statewide — a quarter as deep as normal in southwestern Colorado — and weather forecasters are predicting a relatively warm, dry winter for most of the state.

The Gunnison River Basin reported snowpack levels 29 percent of normal Monday, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture; and the South Platte River Basin was at 57 percent of normal.

The next few months do not look a whole lot better.

"Oh, it's dry and grim," said Klaus Wolter, a meteorology researcher with the University of Colorado and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Boulder.
. . .
Wolter said this winter may disappoint those who love winter storms. "Everything seems to be shifted north this year," he said.

That's despite the strong La Niña weather system that has set up in the Pacific Ocean. La Niñas usually mean dry falls and springs and snowier-than-average winters in the mountains.

La Niñas occur when temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean are lower than normal. That affects weather patterns around the globe and often brings extra moisture to Colorado in December or January.

"I don't see that happening this year," Wolter said. "The storm tracks are shifted north," along with the jet stream.

Ken Reeves, a senior meteorologist and director of forecasting for AccuWeather Inc., agreed with Wolter.

"There's going to be a tremendous amount of moisture firehosed up into the Pacific Northwest, and the question is, will any of that end up in Colorado's central mountains?"

"Right now, I think it probably won't get much closer than Utah, western Wyoming," Reeves said. "It is a possibility, but I don't see a spout of storms piling up snow there this year."
. . .
"I am very concerned that Colorado, which is essentially drought-free on the national drought monitor, might see regions of drought develop by spring," Wolter said.

Whoops!

In fact, getting the weather gurus to admit their models are flawed or that their forecasts are off is incredibly difficult, even in the face of countervailing evidence:

Forecasters are holding to their predictions of a dry winter for Colorado despite blasts of snow that have continued into mid-January and set snowpack records in the southwestern mountains.

Admitting that the string of major storms over the past six weeks caught him off guard, one top federal forecaster nonetheless said a strong La Nina effect is likely to keep the state mostly dry through March.

"I'm sticking with my forecast, except that I acknowledge I have some egg on my face," said Klaus Wolter, a meteorologist affiliated with the University of Colorado and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Wolter said his prediction applied to the January-March period, not to December - a point he said he didn't make clear enough in media interviews. Even so, he said the string of big, wet storms running through the state late last year was historic.

"I certainly can't remember in 20 years of living here anything like that," he said. "I think we should count our blessings. We got lucky."

That "moisture pipeline," Wolter said, was fueled by the so-called Pineapple Express, a weather system with its origins near the Hawaiian tropics. But, he added, it is bound to dry up.

"The writing is on the wall," he said.

That was a month ago--mid-January.

The writing is on the wall--but the meteorologists/climatologists don't seem capable of reading it.

Local snowpack numbers are at impressive levels. More amazement:

7News Chief Meteorologist Mike Nelson says in his 17 years here in Colorado, he cannot remember a more prolific snow season in the high country as they are seeing this season.