Korea – Heavy snowfall sets new record

Facebook Twitter

Yesterday’s snowfall in South Gyeongsang set a new record for December, said the KMA.

Heavy snowfall is rarely seen in the southern port city.

Soldiers were mobilized yesterday morning to remove snow from roads in front of tollgates near the Baekyang Tunnel in Sasang District, Busan. As snow was not cleared in time, dangerous roads caused traffic jams during rush hour. [NEWSIS]

The Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA) said yesterday the Chungcheong and southern regions of the country, including Busan, Ulsan and South Gyeongsang, had heavy snow from 1 to 3 a.m.: 31 centimeters (12 inches) on Ulleung Island; 20 centimeters in Geoje, South Gyeongsang; 16 centimeters in Hapcheon; 14.6 centimeters in Jinju; 15.5 centimeters in Daegwanryeong; 12.4 centimeters in Daegu and 8.5 centimeters in Gumi as of press time.

Residents in the southern and Chungcheong regions had to deal with snow and icy roads all day long as local governments in the area poorly managed the situation.

About 20 roads in Busan, 24 roads in South Gyeongsang, 11 roads in Daegu and North Gyeongsang, and eight roads in Ulsan as well as roads in mountain regions were closed.

Busan Police said it took more than two hours to travel the two-kilometer (1.2-mile) Gaya Boulevard that connects the Seomyeon and Dongseo overpasses.

“Media reported heavy snow last night, but I don’t see any civil servants removing the snow,” a Busan citizen said.

Most flights at the Daegu, Gimhae and Ulsan airports were canceled.

In areas around Changwon Tunnel and Bulmosan Tunnel, where there are steep roads, vehicles without snow chains were stuck on the icy roads for three to four hours.


Thanks to Argiris Diamantis for this link

5 thoughts on “Korea – Heavy snowfall sets new record”

  1. The funny thing about AGW alarmist pseudoscientists is they have to keep inventing new scenarios to explain why the previous scenario no longer applies.

    It is way too late for them to try to back away – even a little.

    So they invent new BS stories when a previous fairy tale is debunked.

    “Backradiation” doesn’t actually heat anymore when the tenet was challenged by physicists on thermodynamic grounds – now it slows cooling by warming the surface while the “Net” flow is from the surface to space thus satisfying thermodynamics ??

    Huh – the “net” flow – doesn’t that mean the flow of heat is from hot to cold anyway ??

    Just as the critics said – heat flows from hot to cold !

    Now we have melting Arctic ice is responsible for cold winters ???

    Didn’t they say melting Arctic ice would expose the Arctic ocean to more sunlight thus enhancing warming ??

    And what about that missing heat ?

    Isn’t it hilarious they suddenly discovered it decided to hide in the ocean for a while ??

    Why it never did that before atmospheric temperatures started levelling off around 16 years ago is certainly a mystery !!

    Or is this one of seemingly endless chameleon traits displayed when another central tenet of the settled science is inconveniently scuttled by actual scienctific data ?

    The hypothesis is unfalsifiable as it keeps morphing when data becomes inconsistent – which in scientific terms means it is crap !!

    1. nicely put Rosco.
      however those who should be reading or listening..have their fingers in their ears, eyes closed singing nah nah nah nah la la la la, etc
      cos truth is going to hurt em.
      oh boy, come that day:-)

    2. “And what about that missing heat ?

      Isn’t it hilarious they suddenly discovered it decided to hide in the ocean for a while ??”
      Coincidentally , it was supposed to be hiding just below the depth the Argo buoys could reach , much like the troposphere hotspot that was undetectable to radiosonde thermometers , apparently it wasn`t the sort of heat one could detect with a thermometer .

      Magical stuff that CO2 feedback generated heat , it waits until someone tries to measure it , then hides somewhere else or turns invisible .

      Of course it couldn`t be that the assumption of an overwhelmingly positive feed back loop that`s built into the models is wrong , that would put them out of a job

Comments are closed.