Monday
Dec202010
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Met Office says they kept mum
Dec 20, 2010 Climate: MetOffice GWPF is reporting a press release from the Met Office in which they say they did not predict a mild winter. As far as I remember the Met Office stopped issuing long-range forecasts last year, which would tally with the press release. But I have a nagging feeling that I heard something said about it being mild again this winter.
Does anyone remember anything?
Reader Comments (55)
Bish: yes, at WUWT I found this.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/208012/Winter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-Office/Winter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-OfficeWinter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-OfficeWinter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-OfficeWinter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-OfficeWinter-to-be-mild-predicts-
The MET disputes it, saying they never predicted the warm winter. However, the maps the reporter looked at suggested a warm winter, going by his quotes.
Technically, the Met is correct. They never SAID it would be warm. They only supplied maps that said it would be warm.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/20/warm-bias-how-the-met-office-mislead-the-british-public/#more-29800
I don't know if the maps are still at the Met web site. They have probably been disappeared by now.
'Following public research, the Met Office no longer issues long-range forecasts'
So not really because they were getting it so badly wrong so often that it became an embarrassment, or would be the ‘public research’! But there is a difference between a official ‘long-range forecasts' and other announcements and it is in that difference where you will find the problem. Now if this winter had worked out how they 'suggested' they be crowing the fact from the roof tops and this difference would have disappeared .
Remember always allow yourself weasel room.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/12/were-they-misled-by-met-office.html
Breaking news - British government announcement in the last few minutes
'The current cold weather situation in Britain is so serious, the government has decided that we are going to rename 'climate change' to simply 'change' . If anything changes for the worse, it's it will be assumed it is caused by by CO2.
Maybe someone should be lodging FOI requests asking people like the ministry of transport (or what ever the hell they call themselves) who they get weather information from because if its solely from the Met Office, then its no wonder this country grinds to a halt at the slightest sign of Mann Made Global Warming (tm).
Mailman
I think your grace toys with us mere mortals.
Of course we all remember the news stories all over the press about how mild this winter was - the ones in the Express (which doubted the prediction would be true) and the one in the Telegraph spring to mind.
Of course we will find that the Met has some wonderful wordplay in reserve to entertain us. It will probably involve them claiming that the media decided on the message and that their own anouncement at the time contained the required caveats about uncertainty and how difficult this whole thing is.
Obviously we as tax payers are funding not only their supercomputer which is getting the blame, we are also funding the PR 'experts' who have created this devious little policy which they now intend to reveal.
Sack them. Sack them all. Remove their bonuses and sack them some more.
PS - I wonder if Mr Ward is involved in any way ?
PPS - I thought HMG was cutting back on uk.gov departments issuing self-promoting PR ?
Ruddy Met Office. What a bunch of ideologists they turned out to be, hedging their bets whilst kowtowing to the governmental line of AGW. They are an expensive, unnecessary luxury that the country can ill afford. With competetive forecasters who appear to be more on the ball, and don't associate themselves with fictitious predictions for fifty or a hundred years ahead readily available, who needs a biased Met Office, anyway. Public confidence must be just about zero, at the moment.
If one strays into politics, as the Met Office has been doing, you have to accept one of the burdens of political life, which is falsely attributed quotes which you didn't say, but they are so true to life that everyone thinks you did.
E.g.
Peter Mandelon and guacamole and chips.
Winston Churchill and "Don't talk to me about naval tradition. It's nothing but rum, sodomy and the lash". Churchill said he never came out with it, but on hearing it, he wished he had.
I think the Met did stop issuing formal forecasts as you say, but that an Express reporter cobbled this together from long range weather charts. Or something.
The difference between a forecast and a chart? I'm sure it's an important one.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/science/specialist/seasonal/probability/glob_seas_prob.html
"Met Office data suggests mild winter but don't forget last year"
"Its “Barbecue Summer” was a washout while its “mild winter” was the coldest for 31 years, so you might be forgiven for taking the Met Office’s latest prediction with a pinch of salt."
By Andy Bloxham 7:30AM BST 28 Oct 2010
"Although the Met Office no longer issues long-term forecasts, their latest data suggest a high probability of a warmer winter for London, the East of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland."
Notice, data not forecast, its that damn data again!
"As well as the milder winter, the computer concluded that almost all of Britain had a 40 to 60% of being drier than normal, with only the south coast more likely to see normal amounts of rain."
"However, the Met Office warned that the figure were only part of the data used to build predictions for December, January and February’s weather but do not include such influential factors as the El Nino-La Nina high-low pressure system in the Pacific Ocean and the North Atlantic Oscillation, which partly governs the winds and storms which arrive in Britain from the west."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/8090325/Met-Office-data-suggests-mild-winter-but-dont-forget-last-year.html
While we're at it, I'm still angry with the Met Office for the Orwellian change they made to the UK weather map. It's now brown, whereas it used to be green. Brown is indicative of warm, dry conditions. As far as I know, from 30,000 feet up, England is still as green as ever. Anyway my point is that this change was not an accident. It's all part of the grand narrative.
Just saying.....
The Express article says "The latest data comes in the form of a December to February temperature map on the Met Office’s website."
All the Met Office need to do is produce this map, and show that the Express misreported it.
Does anybody else find it amusing that part of the Met Office's site is called "Invent"?
If anybody here is interested in obtaining a detailed and thus far, *accurate* weather forecast, they could do a lot worse than look here:
http://www.yr.no/place/United_Kingdom/
Frankly, it's incredible - forecasts for pretty much any settlement in the UK, hour-by-hour charts for the next two days with temperatures, cloud cover, wind speed and precipitation - and even daring to offer a ten-day forecast. So far it's been exceptional for me - but I only found it a couple of weeks ago..
Free, gratis and for nothing. Courtesy of the Norwegian taxpayer. And they even translate it into English.
Turning Tide
See (my) the link at 8:48.
"The latest data comes in the form of a December to February temperature map on the Met Office’s website.
The eastern half of England, Cornwall, Scotland and Northern Ireland is in for temperatures above the 3.7C (38.6F) average, more than 2C warmer than last winter.
Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/208012/Winter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-Office/Winter-to-be-mild-predicts-Met-Office#ixzz18gupmngI
=============================================
Slightly out on the N.I.
predictionerm 'futurecast' mapThe Met Office have given up forecasting, so they do retrospectives instead.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/uk/observations/snowreport.html
"Have you got snow in your area? Why not let the Met Office know by telling us where you are and how much snow is on the ground? You can help build the national picture by submitting your report using the form below. Your observation will be added to our snow depth observations map"
I was amused to discover that the MO are now sponsored by advertising (there's a little sponsor's ad at the bottom of their 5-day forecasts). Has their gravy supply been restricted..?
BTW, thank you SNTF for the Norwegian link. It looks very promising - perhaps the BBC should be interested...
Does anyone know why the BBC (i.e. Met Office) weather maps show Scotland reduced to half its size in the North - South direction. Does this alter the temperature data?
Well - this forecast from last year is worth re-reading since they were more apparently confident about it than ever.
This summer’s duff forecast also raises questions about why the Met Office makes such predictions public. They are designed more for government or commercial subscribers such as the tourist industry, agriculture and supermarkets. Knowing whether a season will tend to be wet or dry, cold or warm, means that shops can order the appropriate stock. The accuracy of summer forecasts lags way behind that of winter forecasts because less research has gone into them. That is why the Met Office is more confident of its early prediction that this winter will be mild and warmer than last winter, although fairly wet. It says that it is 66 per cent certain that this will be the case — a fairly confident forecast. The problem, of course, is how to communicate that to the public without sounding, well, overconfident.
So, MET stopped giving long term predictions. What are they using that 33 Mio Sterling Megaflop computer for? Black Ops?
At last we have hope! The answer to the cold has been found in Mid-Wales!
"That snow outside is what global warming looks like"
"Unusually cold winters may make you think scientists have got it all wrong. But the data reveal a chilling truth"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm...
"We are simple, earthy creatures, governed by our senses. What we see and taste and feel overrides analysis. The cold has reason in a deathly grip."
"We are simple, rthy creatures, governed by our senses. What we see and taste and feel overrides analysis."
I could but will not comment further
The problem the MO have is that they've done very nicely out of turning themselves into a propaganda trumpet for Global Warming. Just look at their website. The meteorological service has to stay on message. There's always a warmist bias their output.
They may have abandoned long range forecasts, because they were so comically inaccurate, but they continued to drop hints and make statements which could be construed as meaning there would be warming, but which could also be disowned as merely a simplistic misinterpretation of what they meant, depending on how things turned out This is all decidedly slippery; plausible denial and all that.
Dr Vicky Pope explains the science behind the UK Climate Projections:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2009/pr20090618a.html
Off topic BUT I just heard a professor of meteorology on the ITV news say we should expect more cold winters because... wait for it... the sun has been very inactive lately! Did I hallucinate?
From the Winter Resilience Review of July 2010:
54. We have discussed these issues in some depth with the Met Office and their climate research team at the Met Office Hadley Centre, and with other experts. Our findings are presented in more depth in Chapter 12 (Weather Forecasting and Climate Change), but in summary we understand that:
- The probability of the next winter being severe is virtually unrelated to the fact of just having
experienced two severe winters, and is still about 1 in 20;
- The effect of climate change is to gradually but steadily reduce the probability of severe winters
in the UK
http://tinyurl.com/24cypah
and from the final report of October 2010:
Recommendation 17: Given that the probability of next winter being severe continues to
be relatively small but that severe winters are still possible despite the warming trend........
http://tinyurl.com/26rlc2y
and here we are 2 months later.
Bit O/T, but couldn't resist linking to this:-
http://globalwarmingsuperheroes.com/bad-guy-of-the-week/bad-guy-of-the-week-james-delingpole-jd-2/
Is "Global Warming Superheroes" the latest manifestation of the (Spanish Inqui.......) Climate Science Rapid Response Team - I think we should be told.
Either way - they need our support over there guys.
Using LDLAS's link, one finds that the current Met Office prediction for Jan/Feb/Mar of 2011 to be (using London or more generally SE of England as the reference point) 5-25% well above normal (top quintile) and 25-40% well below normal (bottom quintile).In tercile terms, 0-20% above normal; 40-60% near-normal; 40-60% below-normal. The Met Office's caveat, in bold lettering: "Raw data are displayed for use by international meteorological centres. This does not constitute a seasonal forecast for a given location."
So the current not-forecast for the remainder of the winter is rather negative.
November not-forecast for Dec/Jan/Feb (for the same region) is 0-20% above normal; 20-40% near-normal; 40-60% below-normal. 25-40% chance of well below normal (lower quintile)
October not-forecast for Nov/Dec/Jan is 60-80% above normal; 20-40% near-normal; 0-20% below normal. 40-55% well above normal (upper quintile). The further-out not-forecasts made in October for Dec/Jan/Feb & Jan/Feb/Mar also show a high probability of "well above normal". I'm guessing that these October maps are the basis for the claim that the Met Office forecast a mild winter; however, see their caveat recited above.
My conclusion from this admittedly small sample, is that the Met Office's prediction 1 month out is OK, but their longer-term predictive ability is quite suspect.
Re Foxgoose
That site seems to have invented some new cause of globular warming. C02 emissions. What is it with people using a zero instead of an O? Guess it shows their level of understanding.
Fantastic game-changing comment over at WUWT on Met Office advice.
I don't know how to link to it directly so, hoping I'm not stepping on anyones toes, I'll paste it in full.
ScientistForTruth says:
December 20, 2010 at 3:57 pm
The Met Office were consulted by the UK Department for Transport in a report out in October concerning preparedness of the transport infrastructure for winter. In October they were projecting a warmer than average winter with around 70% confidence. The Met Office advised that there was a 1-in-20 chance of a severe winter this year, or any year. In 2008, then, there was thus a 1-in-8000 chance that we would have three consecutive severe winters. The Met Office complain that the general public don’t understand risk and statistics, but I have to say that I don’t favour 1-in-8000 odds, i.e. the likelihood of three severe winters in a row only likely to occur once every 8000 years. I’m afraid these are actual Met Office statistics. If THEY understand statistics and risk, they should be repenting in dust and ashes by now because those odds are just way too long. Something is driving the weather/climate that they have absolutely no idea about. Now, we know that the models that the Met Office use for climate change projections are the very same models as they use for weather forecasting – you might think they’d be different, but they categorically claim that they are the same.
With odds of 8000:1 I’m prone to question whether there is some bias or tomfoolery going on, and with the Met Office that’s a dead certainty. They are headed up by an eco-fanatic and are part of the UK Ministry of Defence.
Here are some extracts from the DfT report ‘The Resilience of England’s Transport Systems in Winter’ (July and October 2010):
“We have discussed these issues in some depth with the Met Office and their climate research team at the Met Office Hadley Centre…we are advised to assume that the chance of a severe winter in 2010-11 is no greater (or less) than the current general probability of 1 in 20…The probability of the next winter being severe is virtually unrelated to the fact of just having experienced two severe winters, and is still about 1 in 20. The effect of climate change is to gradually but steadily reduce the probability of severe winters in the UK…we need to understand and accept that the chance of a severe winter is still relatively small…the probability of next winter being severe continues to be relatively small.”
Remember – based on the Met Office models (on which the whole climate change scam is based), three severe winters in a row has a probability of 1-in-8000, or 0.0125%. Or, put it the other way, in 2008 the Met Office would have been 99.9875% certain that we would not have three severe winters on the trot. Start looking at these probabilities stacking up and understand that the global warming mantra is a scam.
We are always being reminded that weather is not climate. Fine. But when once-in-8000 year ‘weather’ events turn up you really do have to start asking questions. When the Met Office in their UKCP08 report were projecting much warmer summer and winter temperatures in UK to 70% and 90% confidence, that same year they would have put 99.9875% confidence on there not being three extreme winters on the trot.
Hoi Polloi hit the nail on the head!
The Met Office were reported as saying they were no longer issuing "Long Term" forecasts. In my opinion, simply because they looked fools every time they did and the poor souls must get tired of Piers Corbyn sticking on up them!
It does beggar the point though that they gave it up but still insist they can forecast out 100 + years of climate!
It really is time this, "Not fit for the purpose" bunch of miscreants, had their budgets reigned in and the super dupa computer handed over to guys playing games in need of processing power!
The BBC is reporting that Beddington is being asked to assess/determine whether Britain should be making greater investments in cold-weather technologies - presumably more grit, more spreaders, more ploughs etc - in anticipation of colder winters in the future.
Surely Beddington has already served up his assessment of what Britain should be doing regarding adaptation to future climate. That's what he does, isn't it? And yet here we are with diminished servicing: barely any grit, barely enough ploughs or grit spreaders, fewer roads being treated (around here, it's pretty much bus-routes only, no side-roads at all, barely treated B-roads and link roads), slower response, no pavement gritting any more, and essentially no investment in cold-resilience infrastructure.
It's reasonable to assume that Beddington, like Viner at the CRU, has asserted that, owing to climate change, snow in Britain is pretty much "a thing of the past". It's also reasonable to assume, given the state we're in right now, that Beddington sold last winter as a rare or one-off event, not to be repeated any time soon. A "weather-not-climate, nothing to see here" hand-wavery type of thing.
And so it's reasonable to presume that, what the BBC describes as a request to Beddington for an assessment is actually more likely a request for a REassessment, in something of a "Say WHAT, Prof. Sir Beddington!?" moment.
Bish>
Re the Met Office forecast/not-a-forecast: as I understand it, the Met released what they've come up with - a temperature map - whilst saying it was not a prediction, and shouldn't be relied upon. The spin was put on it by the press.
RoyFOMR>
The issue there is whether the three winters are statistically independent events or not. If they are entirely independent, then there is no problem with cubing the probability of a single occurrence. That the chances of three such winters happening independently were 8000:1 suggests strongly that they are dependent.
I suppose in the Orwellian language of climate "science", having the public tell you you're shyte, and finally believing them, counts as "Following public research".
Perhaps the Met Office were simply providing scenarios where scenarios are images of the future, or alternative futures? They are neither predictions nor forecasts. Rather, each scenario is one alternative image of how the future might unfold.
Although this wording might seem strange - it comes (directly) from the IPCC document describing climate models, which after all share much underlying code with the Met Office programs (according to 'Prof' Julia Slingo).
Here's the reference for those requiring chapter and verse:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/emission/index.php?idp=25
There can be no better example (from July 2010) of how badly the Met Office get their statistics wrong (in a government report).
http://transportwinterresilience.independent.gov.uk/docs/interim-report/wrr-interim-report-2010-07-26.pdf
They specifically assume that severe winters are statistically independent from one year to the next
They assume as a starting point that winters will become warmer and wetter.
Their logic leads to the conclusion that the occurrence of three severe winters in a row would be a 1/8000 probability.
Well, we have just had that. Normally in science a 1/8000 occurrence against forecast would imply something wrong with the models.
Here are the relevant paragraphs:
3.2 The winter of 2008/09 was the worst for almost 20 years and followed a decade of relatively mild winter conditions (Figure 3.1). The weather was characterised by a series of short, sharp snow events and prolonged low temperatures, which caused widespread travel disruption. The first snow event occurred between 28–30 October with snow falling most notably over South East and Central South England, coupled with very low minimum temperatures for the time of year. There were further snow events in December and January. The heaviest snow fell overnight on 1/2 February over South East and Eastern England which brought many transport networks to a standstill the following morning. London had not seen similar levels of snowfall for 18 years. Bus services were withdrawn and runways were closed at Heathrow.
3.11 The winter of 2009/10 was the coldest in the UK for 30 years (Figure 3.2), and the duration of freezing temperatures and extent of coverage of both snow and ice were highly unusual. There were widespread and heavy snowfalls across the country.
3.12 From Thursday 17 December 2009 to Friday 15 January 2010 the UK experienced a spell of very low temperatures and significant snowfalls that affected almost the whole country. This was the most widespread and prolonged spell of this type across the UK since December 1981/ January 1982. Large areas of England, Wales and Northern Ireland regularly saw night-time temperatures falling well below freezing, and on occasion below -10 °C, while in Scotland nighttime temperatures in the Highland glens regularly fell to -15 °C or lower. Daytime temperatures in many areas frequently struggled to rise above freezing, often remaining several degrees below.
3.13 The freezing temperatures were accompanied by widespread snowfalls on many days throughout the period. With daytime temperatures often failing to rise above freezing, little thawing occurred so fresh snowfalls added to previous accumulations. Depths of 10 to 20 cm were widespread across England and Wales, whilst across upland areas of northern England and in the Scottish Highlands, depths exceeded 30 cm in many areas.
12.10 We have explored these issues in some depth with the climate research team at the Met Office Hadley Centre. The starting point is the slow but steady rise in average global temperatures. The consensus on the UK is that on average summers will become warmer, and winters will become warmer and wetter, though the next 10–15 years may be dominated by natural variability. When severe weather events happen they may be more extreme in terms of heat and rainfall.
12.11 Although the probability of severely cold winters in the UK is gradually declining, there is currently no evidence to suggest similar changes in extremes of snow, winds and storms in the UK.
12.12 We have also explored whether or not the occurrence of two successive severe winters influences the probability of a third in succession – in other words, is there any evidence of clustering? There is some small influence from year to year but these matters are still very uncertain and it would be safer to assume that there is statistical independence between one winter and the next.
12.13 In other words, we are advised to assume that the chance of a severe winter in 2010–11 is no greater (or less) than the current general probability of 1 in 20.
12.14 For the purpose of this report, the following summarises what we understand:
O The probability of the next winter being severe is virtually unrelated to the fact of just having experienced two severe winters, and is still about 1 in 20.
O The effect of climate change is to gradually but steadily reduce the probability of severe winters in the UK.
In my opinion the MetOffice is hooked on the global warming meme, and indeed believed in October that there would be a mild winter. Having repented giving us the wrong seasonal forecasts after six failed forecasts on the run, but unable to get off there fix of forecasting global warming seasons, they took the methadone instead of the smack and issued the maps from which they would have made their forecasts leaving others to make the forecasts.
They are in deep trouble, Boris Johnson was asking yesterday why Piers Corbyn (Phil Jones' "prat") was able to get 80-90% accuracy using a PC in an office above a shop on Borough Road while the MetOffice with its £33M computer seems unable to forecast weather at all, long term,or short term. I think this statement is a realisation by the MetOffice (and simultaneously an indication of their arrogance in having believed that their poor forecasting can be brushed under the carpet) that there are real dangers to their funding, and indeed their continued existence, if they continually get forecasts so wrong. Try it for yourself, screen snatch the BBC's home page every day and compare each day with the previous day's forecast, look at all the days in the forecast and watch them change daily, I doubt they have a 50% accuarcy in their 24 hour forecasts.
The problem with the Met Office is that they are no longer a joke. When they repeatedly make biased forecasts which lead the country into denial about its climate, and consequently into total lack of preparation for perfectly ordinary British winters which have occurred several time in the lifetime of anyone 50 or over, they are a real threat to life.
People are dying in the UK because of a lack of preparedness for winter which is directly due to climate denialism at the Met Office. We have got to put a stop to it, and start preparing to deal with the climate and the weather we actually have, not the fantasy one in the Met Office's computer models.
Could it be that the Met Office don't issue public seasonal forecasts but do to their paying customers? I would be interested to know what advice they gave to councils.
The BBC's "PM" programme yesterday had on some halfwitted (or fraudulent) Oxford Climate Physics "Professor", stuck in the US by the collapse of our Airports.
When he was asked to square the obvious present "weather" with his "climate" prognoses he repeated the usual mantra about how toasty it was in NE Canada and Southern Greenland. And said that they really needed more and more powerful Supercomputers to "model" things a little bit more accurately.
Nice to see the BBC in their usual "paper over the cracks" mode.
What I find ironic is that the Met Office seems to have confused weather and climate, but in the opposite direction to usual.
So, we're all familiar with the "What ever happened to climate change, eh?" view. That is, that the weather which is currently going on outside your window tells you something about the climate in the future.
But the Met Office seems to take the exact opposit view - that climate predictions tell you what the weather is going to do. And in particular that a warming climate MUST means warmer weather, with milder, snow-free winters. Obvious, innit? Which bit of "It's getting (catastrophically) warmer" don't you understand?
Believe the Met Office, then, all you local councils and airport operators, and you should be selling your road gritters, snow ploughs, and airplane de-icers on ebay. You should be preparing for a sweltering tomorrow, not wasting your time trying to sort out the problems actually confronting us today.
We expats living in Germany have got a word for it, and that word is "Schadenfreude" - the pure joy of watching petards being hoisted.
At the link "http://www.yr.no/place/United_Kingdom/" you can key in parameters to select the July 2010 4 to 6 months outlook for Europe.
This shows UK temp as 20% below average, 20% average and 60% above average for Oct / Nov / Dec.
It does say "This does not constitute a seasonal forecast for a given location".
That's all right then, it wasn't a forecast so it doesn't matter that it was wrong.
The Met office has lost the plot completely.
Here's anice screen-grab at Autonomous Mind:
http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2010/12/20/met-office-memory-or-honesty-deficiency/
oops
Using half-baked statistics in support of your doctrine can have tragic consequences.
"The panel had earlier decided Sir Roy had not meant to mislead the Clark trial, but said his evidence had done so because it "erroneously implied" two natural deaths in a family would have to be independent of one another."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4685511.stm
"What are they using that 33 Mio Sterling Megaflop computer for?"
Did anyone else hear Sir David King on R4 this morning suggesting that what they really needed was an even bigger computer? He also claimed that we had had a really hot summer - I wonder where he was..?
Additional information from the MET regarding the results of their public survey...
"But we don't do seasonal forecasts in public any more because the public said they preferred forecasts over a shorter time scale with more detail."
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/69562,news-comment,news-politics,met-rival-predicts-another-snowy-winter
One might ask Michael Lawrence of the Met Office what kind of winter is in "opposition" to the snow, ice and bitter cold predicted by PWS?
Michael Lawrence, a Met Office forecaster, questioned the veracity of the PWS claims, saying: "What these forecasters do is pit themselves in opposition to what we say and if they get it right they get a lot of publicity."
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/69562,news-comment,news-politics,met-rival-predicts-another-snowy-winter#ixzz18kcCCrIQ