Sunday, January 23, 2005

Great blizzard 2005

This blizzard has been beautiful, and it has probably defeated the Big Blizzard of 1978. I barely remember some blizzards in Czechoslovakia when I was a kid, but it is conceivable that this one was better. Below you will find the world's largest personal collection of photographs taken during the blizzard.
It contains roughly 220+ pictures. Microsoft Internet Explorer is recommended because it offers you the luxury of thumbnails, filmstrip, and so forth. When your Service Pack 2 blocks the "active content", left-click the tab and choose "Allow blocked content" (twice).



If your internet browser causes any problems, you may also find the pictures directly in this directory:
There are many potentially exciting things on the photographs that you might like - for example, many people are skiing on Massachusetts Avenue, Harvard Square, Memorial Drive, and so forth. The Charles snow fields (formerly known as Charles River) is completely white. Various types of trucks; nice girls; cute children are shoveling snow. Children immersed in snow are playing weird games and they're sliding from a staircase.




Most of the cars are completely buried, and it is often difficult to decide whether there is a car hidden in the snow or not. A few chimneys are desperately trying to emit some greenhouse gases and increase the temperature a little bit. Matthews Hall claims to have an "accessible entrance" although it does not seem terribly accessible. A vendor machine sells ice. Churches are welcoming you although you obviously can't get there.

I wonder what all the animals (and homeless people) are doing in this kind of weather. No doubt, many of them die - including various types of insect and parasites. I feel compassionate about most of them, but on the other hand, I would like to hope that this weather will eliminate some parasites - for example the global warming alarmists - at least for a couple of years. Those blinded people disconnected from reality who want us to pay trillions of dollars and halve the growth of the economy so that the next blizzard will have 20 more centimeters of snow.

But I'm afraid that this kind of organisms will never disappear naturally. They will just mutate a little bit, and modify their fairy-tales so that it also includes blizzards as a warning announcing the doom. Some of them will say that the greenhouse effect increases the fluctuations - which is incidentally not true as everyone who has seen a greenhouse, whose very goal is to keep the conditions more or less constant, knows very well; others will return to the global cooling paradigm. If the global warming alarmists were scientists, such incidents as the blizzard would probably devastate them for a while. But they're not scientists.

OK, let's stop this pessimism and let's enjoy the beautiful gifts of mother Nature!

Europe: Although Europe can't compete with New England, most of Western Europe (Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, Germany, Austria) is under snow, too. Portugal and Spain enjoy unusually chilly weather. Southeastern Europe has not seen much snow so far.

Alarmism of new dimensions: The Independent has described a new "report" about the approaching global climate catastrophe. I won't dedicate a special article to this silliness - just one paragraph. In comparison with previous reports, this "report" is improved by defining a "critical threshold". They argue that the doomsday will occur when the concentration of CO2 jumps from the current 379 parts per million to 400 parts per million, which will be roughly on September 11, 2015. This is the judgement day. This report is also new in another aspect: they don't even try to pretend that there is any serious science behind it - they openly say that the report was prepared mostly by some politicians and former politicians - and they don't say what climatic effects are exactly supposed to happen. On the other hand, they enumerate all the catastrophes that should happen - drink water and agriculture will suddenly disappear, and all this incedible crap - and all the political demands they have. This new form of terrorism proves my point that the fearmongers will never disappear naturally, and until there is enough consensus that these people should be legally responsible for their fearmongering, the situation will deteriorate further.

8 comments:

  1. "Some of them will say that greenhouse effect increases fluctuations - which is incidentally a nonsense as everyone who has seen a greenhouse knows very well" - is this an attempt at being funny?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello Lubos,

    Very nice pictures! I missed a shot of Kresge auditorium though.
    It's really amazing to see Cambridge under such a huge deck of snow, and it's been a long time since something like that happened here in Amsterdam.

    How long did you walk to take all those pictures? (I would say something like 3 1/2 hrs, you even went as far as Porter Sq)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello!

    Thanks! Too bad I missed the Kresge auditorium. My apartment is actually near Porter Square, so a more accurate formulation is that I walked a little bit away from Cambridge, but the main walk was from Porter Square to Boston.

    All the best
    Lubos

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lubos said:
    "I feel compassionate about most of them, but on the other hand, I would like to hope that this weather will eliminate some parasites - for example the global warming alarmists - at least for a couple of years. Those blinded people disconnected from reality who want us to pay trillions of dollars and halve the growth of the economy so that the next blizzard will have 20 more centimeters of snow."

    It's odd for a super string theoretist, some one completely disconnected from reality, to accuse another group of people, global warmers, of being blinded and disconnect from reality. Rather ironic, isn't it?

    Being a physicist, albert only a "theoretical" one, you Lubos should be able to cite physics reasons and evidences to back up your opposition to the global warming theory. I have never seen you done that.

    I disagree with the notion that the increase of green house gases due to human activities would cause disastrous consequences. But, green house effects due to green house gases is a very legitimate scientific fact, backed up by strong experimental and observational evidences.

    For example, we know there's a thick atmosphere composed mostly of carbon dioxide, on the surface of Venus. The surface temperature of Venus, as measured, is 500 degrees higher than what it should have been, based on its distance from the Sun, if there has been no freen house effect. That's an un-deniable fact supporting the green house effect of the CO2 gas.

    Another evidence involves water, which is actually the main green house effect contributer in the earth's atmosphere. Most people have the experience that everything else equal, when it's cloudy, it's normally warmer during the night. And when it is cloudless, it's cooler during the night. In the desert area the night temperature drops quicker because the air is drier. So the water content in the atmosphere do help to keep the warmth of the earth surface from dissipating into the space.

    What is questionable, is not the fact that green house gases do cause green house effects. But what is to be questioned is the quantitative amount how much the effect is. In that aspect global warmers completely exagerated the magnitude or significance of global warming effect attributable to human activities.

    The biggest green house effect contributer in the atmosphere is water, which is un affected by human activities. CO2 contribute only a very small factor in the total green house effects, due to its low concentration in the atmosphere. Amoung which the CO2 that can be attributed to human activities of burning fossil fuels is less than 1/7 of the total CO2 in the atmosphere.

    Actually even the 1/7 figure is way much exagerated already. Each year, the CO2 released by breathing animals and fishes, and that is absorbed by plants, are many many times higher than what human can release by burning fossil fuels.

    Even the fossil fuels we burn, were actually remains of ancient plantations. We humen can produce not a single gram of carbon today. All the fossil fuels never existed before there was life on the earth. At that time, all carbons on the earth would have existed as CO2 in the atmosphere, not as coals in the crust.

    Had the green house effects reach the magnitude suggested by global warmers, the pre-life earth would have a green house temperature so hot that life could not have originated in the first place!!!

    Global warming is but just one of the several biggest peudo sciences in the establishment camps.

    Quantoken

    ReplyDelete
  5. "... and halve the growth of the economy so that the next blizzard will have 20 more centimeters of snow."

    How will economy qrowth affect snow depth, in the absence of GW effects?

    "Some of them will say that the greenhouse effect increases the fluctuations - which is incidentally not true..."

    Of course its probably true if the Great Worriers are correct - the effect will cause a transition from one feedback strength to another during which the system will have larger variations.

    Unless the system is heavily damped, which probability I estimate lumoesqian wise to be 10^-6. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Torbjan asked:
    "How will economy qrowth affect snow depth, in the absence of GW effects?"

    The reverse is true. Snow depth do affect economy growth. The northeast is bought to a none-productive economic halt due to the heavy snow.

    I wonder where Lubos is. Still trying to dig a path to go from his home to his office. He calls this "a gift from nature"? The other day when I meantioned the place I live experienced hot temperature up to 90 degree, some idiot thought I was kidding!!! That, being able to enjoy good weather and Sun bath on the beach whole year around, is what I consider a gift from nature.

    The global warming theory is a much much bigger and powerful establishment pseudo science, in comparing with the super string small potato.

    In my view, the real crisis is not in the CO2 produced by burning of fossil fuels, the real crisis is in the fact that we may not have too much fossil fuel left to burn and produce green house gases. I do not know what we do when we run out of last drop of petroleum and burn last chunck of coal. That day is only one or two decades and at most three decades away and any replacement is still far from sight.

    Quantoken

    ReplyDelete
  7. Quantoken, you're onto a sure thing. Lubos will not want to delete comments that say global warming is BS, even if the comment also attacks string theory or calls Lubos an idiot or so on.

    Global warming is indeed a big potatoes scam!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Lubos,

    I used to be an MIT undergraduate and really enjoyed your pictures since I don't live in Cambridge anymore. Thanks! Long live snow!

    - qmechanic

    ReplyDelete