2008: Ninth warmest year on record

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 2:05 AM GMT on January 21, 2009

Share this Blog
3
+

The temperature statistics are in, and the year 2008 ranks as the ninth warmest year for the globe on record, making it the coolest year since 2000, according to an analysis compiled by NASA. NOAA's National Climatic Data Center rated 2008 the eighth warmest on record, and the British Climate Research Unit rated it tenth warmest. NASA noted that given the uncertainty in the measurements, a range of 7th to 10th warmest was reasonable. Global temperature records extend back to 1880. December 2008 was also the eighth warmest December for the globe on record.

The average global temperature the past five years (and the last ten years) is the highest on record. The top ten warmest years since 1880 have all occurred in the past twelve years. So, despite the impressive cold blast in the Eastern U.S. this winter, the global climate is warming. The relatively cool temperatures of 2008 probably represent a normal year-to-year fluctuation in the weather. Cool weather is to be expected globally during a strong La Niña event in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, which was present during the first part of 2008 (see the cool blue colors over the Equatorial Pacific in Figure 1). It is no surprise that the last year it was cooler, 2000, was also the last time we had a La Niña event. With La Niña conditions beginning to develop again this year, I'd be surprised if 2009 turns out to be a record warm year. Dr. James Hansen of NASA is predicting a new global record temperature either this year or in 2010, though.


Figure 1. Global temperature anomalies in 2008 compared to the 1950-1980 baseline period. Below-average temperatures are shown in blue, average temperatures are white, and above-average temperatures are red. (Gray indicates no data.) Most of the world was either near normal or warmer than normal. Eastern Europe, Russia, the Arctic, and the Antarctic Peninsula were exceptionally warm (1.5 to 3.5 degrees Celsius above average). The temperature in the United States in 2008 was not much different than the 1951-1980 mean, which makes 2008 cooler than all of the previous years this decade. Large areas of the central and eastern Pacific Ocean were cooler than the long-term average, linked to a La Niña episode that began in 2007. The graph shows the long-term trend in surface temperatures since 1880. The annual average temperatures are shown in light orange, and the jaggedness of the line indicates how much the average global surface temperature varies from year to year. Because climate is so variable from year to year, it can be easier to spot long-term trends through multi-year averages. The dark red line shows the five-year running average, which is an average of five years of annual temperatures centered on a given year. Even this five-year average shows that climate has ups and downs, but the long-term increase in global average surface temperatures is obvious. The gray barbells indicate the range of uncertainty. Not surprisingly, the uncertainty is larger for older measurements than for more recent ones. Image credit: NASA.

A cool and snowy December in the U.S.
For the contiguous U.S., December was the 35th coolest December, ranking it in the coldest 30% of all Decembers observed since records began in 1895. December 2008 had near-average precipitation, ranking 43rd wettest. It was the 8th wettest December on record in the East North Central U.S., and 9th wettest for the Central U.S. Only the South experienced below average precipitation during the month. For the year 2008, temperatures in the U.S. were not much different than the 1951-1980 mean, which makes 2008 the coolest year since 1997. U.S. records set in December 2008 (courtesy of http://extremeweatherguide.com/updates.asp):

Spokane, WA: All-time 24-hour snowfall, 19.4", 12/17-12/18
Spokane, WA: All-time single storm snowfall: 23.3", 12/17-12/18
Sandpoint, ID: All-time 24-hour snowfall, 27.0"
Jackson, WY: All-time 24-hour snowfall, 27.0"
Fargo, ND: Snowiest month on record: 33.5"
Spokane, WA: Snowiest month on record: 61.5"
Green Bay, WI: Snowiest month on record: 45.6"
Madison, WI: Snowiest month on record: 40.4"
Wausau, WI: Snowiest month on record: 37.6"
Idaho: All-time 24-hour state snowfall record set at Dollar Hide, 46.5", 12/26-12/27 (not confirmed)

At the end of 2008, 20% of the contiguous United States was in moderate-to-exceptional drought. This is a decline from the 28% of the U.S. that was under similar drought conditions at the end of 2007. The average precipitation for the U.S. in 2008 was 30.48 inches, which is 1.34 inches above average. 2008 was the wettest year on record for New Hampshire and Missouri, second wettest for Massachusetts, and third wettest for Connecticut, Illinois, and Iowa. Also, 2008 was the fourth wettest year for Indiana, fifth wettest for Maine, Michigan, and Vermont, seventh wettest for New York, and eighth wettest for Kansas and Rhode Island.

Next post
Check out Ricky Rood's latest blog, called Cold in the East: A rant. There is a lot of misinformation circulating in the media right now about climate change, and Ricky and I will be doing our best to try to explain what is fact and what is crap in the coming weeks. I posted one such discussion last week, when I showed that the recent claims that sea ice is back to 1979 levels were a clever bit of cherry picking of the data that hides the critical summertime loss of Arctic sea ice. I'll have a new blog post on Friday.

Jeff Masters

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 678 - 628

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14Blog Index

678. KEHCharleston
4:37 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
RE: poll Door #2
Quoting Skyepony:
Big chunk of Antarctica's pennesula is about to break off. POES flies over it a few times a day, for another few weeks it can't get a good reading through clouds but that's no reason to toss the data on clear days. Ecosystems are creaping toward the poles with record melts occuring in many places. The argument that the oceans are undermeasured, with satalites, countless buoys & even the cruise ships getting in on collecting data doesn't make much sense. Your not gonna find the data out there in a media article, you don't need to turn to research either. Start with the links Dr Master's left above & begin to learn about the satellites, find their data pages. It is out there & available to look at. Right around the 15th it gets grouped into a nice monthly package that is pretty easy to understand. Looking beyond the data it's obvious our world has gotten a little hotter. It would be irresponsible to throw the bushel out over a few bad apples.


RE: Buoys - I still would love if the numbering system made more sense. Especially as buoys are added. Perhaps the first 2-3 digits indicated the location (North Atlantic, Caribbean, Indian etc, etc) the next 2 digits the type of buoy and the last digits would be an individual number for that type buoy in that particular body of water. I know that I check the Folly Beach buoy daily for it's readings.

RE: Ships
An interesting adjunct to monitoring the oceans, I think. Very cool. For those interested you might find this site helpful.

RE:Satellites
I have been interested in figuring which satellites I am seeing above me. Even using REAL TIME SATELLITE TRACKING it is not as easy as I had hoped. (It does not help that I am usually not anywhere near my computer when I see the light)
There are other websites as well, I am just beginning this 'hobby' so I have not tried them all out.
I am hoping some of you could share the sites you use to track the satellites above your head.

Though I am not sure that I agree the above covers the oceans.
According to NOAA:
The ocean covers 71 percent of the Earth's surface and contains 97 percent of the planet's water, yet more than 95 percent of the underwater world remains unexplored.
That is an awful large part of the earth that has been ignored in this Global Warming Debate.

I heartily agree that most of us want 'the facts, ma'am, just the facts'. Both side are playing politics and (I suspect) fast and loose with statistics.

In any case -
The US still needs a real energy policy

Pollution is still a hazard

We our depending on the wrong people for the energy that keeps us running (where is that good old American independence that has served us well in the past)

We give our jobs and money away, and wonder why our economy suffers

And we blame this political party, or that political party, or other countries, or corporate CEO's, etc, etc, ad nauseum

Be an informed consumer
Read the labels
Support your neighbor
Every day products made in the USA
KEEP IT LOCAL
Member Since: August 19, 2008 Posts: 6 Comments: 2490
677. Skyepony (Mod)
3:16 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
For the poll~ with ENSO where it is, I like 3 or 4.. a few days either side of June 1st.

Big chunk of Antarctica's pennesula is about to break off. POES flies over it a few times a day, for another few weeks it can't get a good reading through clouds but that's no reason to toss the data on clear days. Ecosystems are creaping toward the poles with record melts occuring in many places. The argument that the oceans are undermeasured, with satalites, countless buoys & even the cruise ships getting in on collecting data doesn't make much sense. Your not gonna find the data out there in a media article, you don't need to turn to research either. Start with the links Dr Master's left above & begin to learn about the satellites, find their data pages. It is out there & available to look at. Right around the 15th it gets grouped into a nice monthly package that is pretty easy to understand. Looking beyond the data it's obvious our world has gotten a little hotter. It would be irresponsible to throw the bushel out over a few bad apples.
Member Since: August 10, 2005 Posts: 192 Comments: 38667
676. calusakat
2:57 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
theshepard,

The question regarding reading a medical article was meant as a conversational segue and not as a slur.

Whats the difference between a half crazed leopard and a fully crazed leopard? Would you shoot a fully crazed leopard with a gun or hypodermic needle?

:-)
Member Since: October 10, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 716
675. NEwxguy
2:33 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting charlottefl:



Spring.. I'll take summer at this point :)



when your up north here,you learn not to get too far ahead of yourself,our high temp this month has been 40,about half the days of the month have not gone above freezing,spring sounds just fine for me.
Member Since: September 6, 2007 Posts: 886 Comments: 15950
674. surfmom
2:32 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting conchygirl:
Morning All: A beautiful 32 here this morning and more frost - lost a few plants the last few days.

Surfmom: You were missed on Rob's blog last night. Men dominated!


That's what they think.....

it's not Father Nature.... it's Mother Nature
Member Since: July 18, 2007 Posts: 30 Comments: 26536
673. charlottefl
2:07 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting NEwxguy:
Ok another artic front coming through this weekend,enough already!!!!
Surfmom your quietly waiting for spring,me on the other hand am not being so quiet.
WHERE THE HECK IS SPRING!!!!!!!



Spring.. I'll take summer at this point :)

Member Since: December 18, 2006 Posts: 7 Comments: 2687
672. NEwxguy
1:57 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Ok another artic front coming through this weekend,enough already!!!!
Surfmom your quietly waiting for spring,me on the other hand am not being so quiet.
WHERE THE HECK IS SPRING!!!!!!!
Member Since: September 6, 2007 Posts: 886 Comments: 15950
671. theshepherd
1:48 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
yes dear
;>)
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
670. conchygirl
1:47 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting theshepherd:
mornin' conchy
"Men dominated"?
Of course.
Nothing less could be expected of the Dominant Paradigm.
Morning Shep - ok don't start again. LOL
Member Since: June 11, 2008 Posts: 24 Comments: 5910
669. theshepherd
1:45 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting theshepherd:
664
What I read was a paraphrase of the same old subject that has been beaten black and blue here. Nothing new.
Have I ever read a medical journal article?
Yes,dear. Have you ever given a distemper shot to a half crazed Leopard???
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
668. taistelutipu
1:44 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting all4hurricanes:
Ok lets have a poll on when the first storm of the season will form who thinks Ana will form
1 in January, February, March, or April.
2 May 1-15
3 May 16-31
4 June 1-15
5 June 16-30
6 July 1-15
7 July 16-31
8 After July
I,m going for #5 for now


I go for #3.
Member Since: August 20, 2007 Posts: 12 Comments: 640
667. theshepherd
1:43 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
mornin' conchy
"Men dominated"?
Of course.
Nothing less could be expected of the Dominant Paradigm.
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
666. conchygirl
1:34 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Morning All: A beautiful 32 here this morning and more frost - lost a few plants the last few days.

Surfmom: You were missed on Rob's blog last night. Men dominated!
Member Since: June 11, 2008 Posts: 24 Comments: 5910
665. theshepherd
1:30 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
664
What I read was a paraphrase of the same old subject that has been beaten black and blue here. Nothing new.
Have I ever read a medical journal article?
Yes,dear.
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
664. calusakat
1:18 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Re Post #651

theshepard...Losthobbit did a great job of cutting to the chase on his/her explanation.

Except for needing to break up the comments into several additional paragraphs, it was well thought out and very concise.

What you read was the type of commentary that the grand blogmaster could take a few tips from. Everyone knows the data collection system is flawed and instead of demanding that it be corrected, everyone seems to be willing to accept software assumptions.

As bad as our drug system is, can you possibly imagine how bad it would be if they also used those types of assumptive data analysis. Tons more people would be dying from bad drugs than they are now.

Have you ever read a medical journal article?

Have you noticed the list of references at the end of those articles. With that information a person can go out and determine for themselves whether or not the author of that article is either correct or smoking something funny.

For some reason, those involved in weather study and analysis have a seriously challenged work ethic. Instead of demanding standards of placement and certification, they tap dance around the fact that most of their data is invalid by saying the software has been 'adjusted to account for the anomalies'.

Can anyone here actually prove we have free and easy access to the underlying data that those folks are using?

For some reason, its okay to be a sloppy scientist when it comes to the weather.
Member Since: October 10, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 716
663. theshepherd
1:15 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
In concern for my beloved oceans and the increasing acidity that appears to be having a negative impact on my beloved little coral thingies,I offer the following for review and comment:
Being a stubborn southern Cracker, I like to work on my own vehicles. When my AC compressor went out on my Suburban I decided to fix it myself. Bought some gauges and a how-to book and dug an old vacuum pump out of the,where did I get all this crap, pile and set off on the adventure.
In the intro section was a thorough review of AC theory. To my suprize it seems CO2 is an excellant gas for AC operation. It requires high pressure and any vehicle currently in use would require a costly retrofit to employ CO2 as a coolant. They mentioned future legislation on the subject. Haven't heard any more about it. Where do you get all that CO2 from?
Coal fired power plants are dirty beasts. Coal fired power plants with CO2 scrubbers are clean beasts. They are researching how to dispose of the CO2. Even considering pumping it down onto solid rock at high pressure to displace the water in the rock where it will be forever trapped. Interesting.
It is my desire to bring this technology into the sunshine in hopes that someone who thinks on a far grander scale than me can influence Congress to explore the validity of this idea.
Please comment...
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
662. theshepherd
12:29 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
661 vort
thanx
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
660. surfmom
12:01 PM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting TampaSpin:


Yep ....there should be a front coming thru about next Friday.....


Say it isn't so!
Member Since: July 18, 2007 Posts: 30 Comments: 26536
659. surfmom
11:59 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Got 35 - degrees to wake up to this morning in SWFL - better then yesterday.... still nasty. Quietly waiting for Spring
Member Since: July 18, 2007 Posts: 30 Comments: 26536
658. all4hurricanes
10:57 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Thanks for posting Cybrted
I heard Fanele killed three people and took the roof off of a hospital so it wasn't just a storm passing by.
Member Since: March 29, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 2374
656. CybrTeddy
10:27 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting all4hurricanes:
Ok lets have a poll on when the first storm of the season will form who thinks Ana will form
1 in January, February, March, or April.
2 May 1-15
3 May 16-31
4 June 1-15
5 June 16-30
6 July 1-15
7 July 16-31
8 After July
I,m going for #5 for now


4
Member Since: July 8, 2005 Posts: 259 Comments: 24478
655. Bobbyweather
10:01 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Someone come visit my blog and join the contest. Make your pre-season predictions now.
Member Since: September 7, 2006 Posts: 90 Comments: 2669
654. TampaSpin
5:52 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Futures in Curde Oil is still falling.....
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 179 Comments: 20448
653. KoritheMan
5:37 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting all4hurricanes:
Does the post analysis say anything about any other storms like Gustav or Fay?


No; the reports for them aren't out yet. Just go to the Seasons Archive page on the NHC website, and you'll be able to view the reports there.
Member Since: March 7, 2007 Posts: 597 Comments: 21099
652. theshepherd
4:59 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting presslord:
...but Dolly still did a lot of damage to the "bosom" of the Rio Grands Valley....

I know..."You're tired".
Saw you in Patrap's video earlier. Haven't aged a bit. LOL
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
651. theshepherd
4:54 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting LostHobbit:
As a student of mathematics and of meteorology I love reading your blog from time to time. I am not sure as what to make of the Global Warming issue. I have read “An Inconvenient Truth” and use it to point out good and bad statistics to my classes. Personally I think the world is warming, but is it due to man or part of the evolutionary process of our planet, I don’t know. Some of the processes we have documented, like the 88-year sunspot cycles, are long-term and climate change might be even longer. As you begin to talk about the misinformation that is out in the media about global warming, I would love to see you address some basic concerns I see with data collection, data analysis, and to quote a popular movie, “where’s the money?” After all we know very well that liars figure and figures lie all the time. As soon as any issue becomes politicized, the lies increase dramatically on both sides of an issue as both sides cherry pick their data to prove their point (remember the intelligence leading up to the Iraq war on WMD).
First, your graph (from NASA) on 2008 global temperature has at the bottom a graph from 1880 to present (baselined to the 30 year 1950 – 1980 average) that shows a “global” surface temperature with 3 bars of uncertainty (about 1890, 1945, and 2005). These bars are decreasing over time. On the surface this makes perfect sense. A confidence interval’s margin of error (assumed to be at least part of the uncertainty listed in the graph) is made up of three components, a confidence level (unknown as it is not listed with the graph), a variance term (taken directly from the data), and a sample size term. Since the confidence level is not listed, not much can be said about it in any detail; only general comments can be made. IE, the higher the confidence level the broader the margin of error; conversely the lower the confidence level the smaller the margin of error. The lack of transparency on the confidence level is a red-flag to mathematicians that someone might be skewing results – since a 10% confidence level would have a smaller margin of error and look more “scientific” than a 90% confidence level that might be off the graph.
The variance term brings with it a whole set of issues on data collection. First, what is the precision of the measurements? According to mathematics any change that is below the precision of the measuring device is in the noise of the data collection. For example a thermometer that measures temperature to 1° C would have a precision of 0.5° C. Any changes less than that precision in average temperature data is in the noise level of the collection device and therefore unreliable. Surely the precision of our measuring devices have changed over time making our measurements more accurate and this leads to the lessening of uncertainty expressed in the data. But it also makes drawing conclusions on small changes in earlier collected data more problematical. The second area of concern with the variance term is in the location of the measuring devices themselves. If we look at a continuum of data collection points, most of the ones that have a long history associated with them are in the middle of population centers. Over time these population centers have become temperature “hot points” (as any infrared satellite imagery can document). Increases in temperature over time in these “hot points” could make measurements from these “hot points” to be possible outliers in the overall data. Since humans tend not to populate the distant cold lands, the readings, especially the further back we go, from these areas would be underrepresented in the data and could possibly skew our model’s output (global temperature). Since most of the surface of our planet is oceans, we probably have these areas underrepresented in our data, again especially the further back we go as well. All this to say, that from a statistical standpoint, we have a lot of things that contribute to the uncertainty in the data.
Obviously as the number of collection points increase (our sample size increases), the uncertainty in our data should decrease. We need to be careful to avoid convenience sampling techniques as any statistician would tell you that they are unreliable. Without better insight to the distribution of the collection sites, I couldn’t begin to make any comment on whether that would apply here or not.
For those of us without access to the data, we have to trust others to accurately analyze and interpret the data. Try and research the material on the internet and you will be buried in opinion pro and con on any issue – with lots of purported documentation. With so many examples of peoples’ and companies’ lack of integrity in these studies, many times it comes down to who paid for the study to be done and what vested interests did the investigator have in the study. Obviously if several studies concluded that our climate change is due to a natural evolutionary process of our planet and there’s very little we can do about it, then I don’t think these people will get any more money to study the issue (not from a political viewpoint, but a scientific – no need to spend more money on a settled issue). Insight into these area would be helpful.


Could you repeat that please ?
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10139
650. LostHobbit
4:31 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
As a student of mathematics and of meteorology I love reading your blog from time to time. I am not sure as what to make of the Global Warming issue. I have read “An Inconvenient Truth” and use it to point out good and bad statistics to my classes. Personally I think the world is warming, but is it due to man or part of the evolutionary process of our planet, I don’t know. Some of the processes we have documented, like the 88-year sunspot cycles, are long-term and climate change might be even longer. As you begin to talk about the misinformation that is out in the media about global warming, I would love to see you address some basic concerns I see with data collection, data analysis, and to quote a popular movie, “where’s the money?” After all we know very well that liars figure and figures lie all the time. As soon as any issue becomes politicized, the lies increase dramatically on both sides of an issue as both sides cherry pick their data to prove their point (remember the intelligence leading up to the Iraq war on WMD).
First, your graph (from NASA) on 2008 global temperature has at the bottom a graph from 1880 to present (baselined to the 30 year 1950 – 1980 average) that shows a “global” surface temperature with 3 bars of uncertainty (about 1890, 1945, and 2005). These bars are decreasing over time. On the surface this makes perfect sense. A confidence interval’s margin of error (assumed to be at least part of the uncertainty listed in the graph) is made up of three components, a confidence level (unknown as it is not listed with the graph), a variance term (taken directly from the data), and a sample size term. Since the confidence level is not listed, not much can be said about it in any detail; only general comments can be made. IE, the higher the confidence level the broader the margin of error; conversely the lower the confidence level the smaller the margin of error. The lack of transparency on the confidence level is a red-flag to mathematicians that someone might be skewing results – since a 10% confidence level would have a smaller margin of error and look more “scientific” than a 90% confidence level that might be off the graph.
The variance term brings with it a whole set of issues on data collection. First, what is the precision of the measurements? According to mathematics any change that is below the precision of the measuring device is in the noise of the data collection. For example a thermometer that measures temperature to 1° C would have a precision of 0.5° C. Any changes less than that precision in average temperature data is in the noise level of the collection device and therefore unreliable. Surely the precision of our measuring devices have changed over time making our measurements more accurate and this leads to the lessening of uncertainty expressed in the data. But it also makes drawing conclusions on small changes in earlier collected data more problematical. The second area of concern with the variance term is in the location of the measuring devices themselves. If we look at a continuum of data collection points, most of the ones that have a long history associated with them are in the middle of population centers. Over time these population centers have become temperature “hot points” (as any infrared satellite imagery can document). Increases in temperature over time in these “hot points” could make measurements from these “hot points” to be possible outliers in the overall data. Since humans tend not to populate the distant cold lands, the readings, especially the further back we go, from these areas would be underrepresented in the data and could possibly skew our model’s output (global temperature). Since most of the surface of our planet is oceans, we probably have these areas underrepresented in our data, again especially the further back we go as well. All this to say, that from a statistical standpoint, we have a lot of things that contribute to the uncertainty in the data.
Obviously as the number of collection points increase (our sample size increases), the uncertainty in our data should decrease. We need to be careful to avoid convenience sampling techniques as any statistician would tell you that they are unreliable. Without better insight to the distribution of the collection sites, I couldn’t begin to make any comment on whether that would apply here or not.
For those of us without access to the data, we have to trust others to accurately analyze and interpret the data. Try and research the material on the internet and you will be buried in opinion pro and con on any issue – with lots of purported documentation. With so many examples of peoples’ and companies’ lack of integrity in these studies, many times it comes down to who paid for the study to be done and what vested interests did the investigator have in the study. Obviously if several studies concluded that our climate change is due to a natural evolutionary process of our planet and there’s very little we can do about it, then I don’t think these people will get any more money to study the issue (not from a political viewpoint, but a scientific – no need to spend more money on a settled issue). Insight into these area would be helpful.
649. presslord
3:20 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
...but Dolly still did a lot of damage to the "bosom" of the Rio Grands Valley....
Member Since: August 13, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10492
648. TampaSpin
3:19 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:
tampa...do the long range forecasts show fronts easily passing through fla?


The GFS long range forecast has a low developing on 2/1 SuperBowl Sunday in the GOM and moving across Florida moving up the East Coast as a very strong NorEaster....interesting to see if the Model forecast is correct.
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 179 Comments: 20448
647. presslord
3:18 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
maybe the rainfall of Dolly produced less "jugs" than we thought....
Member Since: August 13, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10492
646. GeoffreyWPB
3:14 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Seems like Dolly was a "bust"
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 11429
645. presslord
3:12 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
....Dolly was "utterly" less impressive than we thought.`...
Member Since: August 13, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10492
644. presslord
3:11 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
.....so....Dolly didn't "stack" up as we'd thought....
Member Since: August 13, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 10492
643. Patrap
2:46 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
MODIS Rapid Response Images Link
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 426 Comments: 129093
642. GeoffreyWPB
2:38 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
hope it is a cool night for my super bowl party!
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 11429
641. GeoffreyWPB
2:36 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
It's funny that here in West Palm..high next Thursday near record high...then temps drop substantially... sure fire signal that a front is coming through
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 11429
640. TampaSpin
2:32 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:
Correct...February 1st


Yep ....there should be a front coming thru about next Friday.....
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 179 Comments: 20448
639. GeoffreyWPB
2:30 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
high this sunday in tampa around 72
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 11429
638. GeoffreyWPB
2:29 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Correct...February 1st
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 11429
637. TampaSpin
2:25 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting GeoffreyWPB:
looks like the high in Tampa Super Bowl Sunday upper 50's to low 60's...Go Steelers!


SuperBowl is not until next Sunday......not this Sunday..
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 179 Comments: 20448
636. SevereHurricane
2:24 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting KoritheMan:


And I remember some people saying it may have been a major hurricane at landfall. <_<


yea i know right, it certainly made me chuckle.
Member Since: September 7, 2008 Posts: 17 Comments: 1604
635. GeoffreyWPB
2:13 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
looks like the high in Tampa Super Bowl Sunday upper 50's to low 60's...Go Steelers!
Member Since: September 10, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 11429
634. TampaSpin
2:05 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
I updated my Weather Blog this afternoon with a SuperBowl Forecast.

TampaSpin's Weather Blog Link
Member Since: September 2, 2007 Posts: 179 Comments: 20448
633. all4hurricanes
1:56 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Does the post analysis say anything about any other storms like Gustav or Fay?
Member Since: March 29, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 2374
632. Patrap
1:53 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Anybody hear cracking to the south?

Link
Member Since: July 3, 2005 Posts: 426 Comments: 129093
631. KoritheMan
1:49 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting SevereHurricane:
The Hurricane Dolly Post Storm Report is out from the NHC. They weakened Dolly to a Cat 1 at landfall.


And I remember some people saying it may have been a major hurricane at landfall. <_<
Member Since: March 7, 2007 Posts: 597 Comments: 21099
630. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
1:17 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Seychelles Meteorological Services
Tropical Cyclone Warning Number TWENTY
EXTRATROPICAL DEPRESSION EX-FANELE (07-20082009)
4:00 AM Réunion January 23 2009
===========================================

At 0:00 AM UTC, Extratropical, Ex-Fanele (995 hPa) located at 27.8S 51.8E has 10 minute sustained winds of 35 knots with gusts of 50 knots. The storm is reported as moving south-southeast at 15 knots

Dvorak Intensity:

Gale-Force Winds
=================
40 NM from the center extending up to 65 NM in the northeastern quadrant and up to 140 NM in the southern semi-circle

Near-Gale Force Winds
======================
70 NM from the center extending up to 110 NM in the northeastern quadrant and up to 230 NM in the southern semi-circle

Forecast and Intensity
=======================
12 HRS: 30.1S 53.1E - 35 knots (EXTRATROPICAL)
24 HRS: 31.8S 54.8E - 30 knots (EXTRATROPICAL)

Additional Information
========================
Classical imagery (IR, Water Vapor) sugges that Finale is no an extratropical cyclone. Residual deep convection that was located in the southern semi-circle has vanished during the night. However, this system still produce some strong winds as shown by the ASCAT Pass around 18.00z. A wide central area of relatively weak winds (diameter about 40 to 50 NM) surrounded by a crown of strong winds can still be depicted.

Most of the available NWP models are in good agreement with the forecast track. Wind should progressively abate along the forecast track before the system merges with a mid-latitude trough at the end of the forecast.
Member Since: May 24, 2006 Posts: 51 Comments: 46160
629. SevereHurricane
1:17 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
The Hurricane Dolly Post Storm Report is out from the NHC. They weakened Dolly to a Cat 1 at landfall.
Member Since: September 7, 2008 Posts: 17 Comments: 1604
628. all4hurricanes
12:17 AM GMT on January 23, 2009
Quoting KoritheMan:


6. Then again, I thought 2008 would start off relatively slow too, and then pick up, so meh.
I asked this last year and some people got it. maybe I'll have a point system.
3pts to those who get it right 1 to those who guessed an adjacent time frame. somebody else did that I forget who
Member Since: March 29, 2008 Posts: 0 Comments: 2374

Viewing: 678 - 628

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14Blog Index

Top of Page

About

Jeff co-founded the Weather Underground in 1995 while working on his Ph.D. He flew with the NOAA Hurricane Hunters from 1986-1990.