January 2010: extremes and monthly summary

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 2:33 PM GMT on February 19, 2010

Share this Blog
3
+

The globe recorded its fourth warmest January since record keeping began in 1880, according to NOAA's National Climatic Data Center. NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies rated January 2010 as the 2nd warmest January on record, behind January 2007. January 2010 global ocean temperatures were the 2nd warmest on record, next to 1998. Land temperatures in the Southern Hemisphere were the warmest on record, but in the Northern Hemisphere, they were the 18th warmest. The relatively cool Northern Hemisphere land temperatures may have been due to the well-above average amount of snow on the ground--January 2010 snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere was the 6th highest in the past 44 years. Global satellite-measured temperatures for the lowest 8 km of the atmosphere were the warmest on record in January, according to both the University of Alabama Huntsville (UAH) and RSS data sets. This was the second time in the past three months that the UAH data set has shown a record high global atmospheric temperature.


Figure 1. Departure of surface temperature from average for January 2010. Image credit: National Climatic Data Center.

A few notable global weather highlights from January 2010:

According to the United Kingdom's Met Office, the U.K. as a whole had its coolest January since 1987 and the eighth coolest January since records began in 1914. Scotland had its coolest January since 1979. During the first two weeks of January, the Irish Republic experienced a spell of extreme cold weather that began in mid-December, resulting in the most extreme cold spell over Ireland since early 1963, according to the Irish Meteorological Service. Most places of the Irish Republic had its coolest January since 1985 and the coolest January since 1963 in the Dublin area.

A rare summer snowfall occurred on January 18th in the town of Bombala, New South Wales, Australia. The town received a light dusting of accumulation, marking the first summer snow in the high terrain of southeast Australia since records began in 1965. The town has an elevation of around 3,000 feet (900 meters) above sea-level. Forecasters said that snow at such low elevations is unusual at any time of year, especially summer. Six days before the snow, temperatures had hit 37°C (99°F) in Bombala.

Eleven inches (28 cm) of snow fell in Seoul, South Korea on the 3rd, marking the greatest snowfall amount for that city since records began in 1937 (Source: BBC).

Central Beijing, China received 3 inches (8 cm) of snow on the 2nd, the most for a single day since January 1951, while suburbs of the city reported 13 inches (33 cm). Over 90 percent of flights at Beijing.s International Airport were affected. On January 6th, temperatures in Beijing dropped to -16.7°C (1.9°F), the lowest minimum temperature in the first ten days of January since 1971.


Figure 2. An unusual sight: Virtually all of Britain was covered by snow on January 7, 2010. Image credit: NASA.

January 2010: near-average temperatures in the U.S.
For the contiguous U.S., the average January temperature was 0.3°F above average, making it the 55th coolest January in the 115-year record, according to the National Climatic Data Center. The U.S. has been on quite a roller coaster of temperatures over the past four months--the nation recorded its third coldest October on record, followed by its third warmest November, followed by its 14th coolest December, followed by an average January. The coolest January temperature anomalies were in Florida, which had its 10th coldest such month. The Pacific Northwest was very warm, with Oregon and Washington recording their 4th warmest January on record. Seattle experienced its warmest January since records began in 1891.


Figure 3. Ranking of temperatures by state for January 2010. Florida had its 10th coldest January on record, while Washington and Oregon had their 4th warmest. Image credit: National Climatic Data Center.

U.S. drought
Precipitation across the U.S. was near average in January. Notably, Arizona had its 5th wettest January and New Mexico its 7th wettest. The only state much drier than average was Michigan, which had its 8th driest January. At the end of January, 3% of the contiguous United States was in severe-to-exceptional drought, a decrease of 4% from the previous month. This is the lowest drought footprint for the country since detailed drought statistics began in 1999.

U.S. records
A few notable records set in the U.S. during January 2010, courtesy of the National Climatic Data Center::

All-time low pressure records were set across most of California, Arizona, Nevada, and southern Oregon on January 20 - 21. This was approximately 10 - 15% of the area of the U.S.

Arizona set its all-time 24-hour state snowfall record: 48" at Sunrise Mountain Jan. 21 - 22.

The 50.7 inches (129 cm) that fell in Flagstaff, AZ Jan. 16 - 23 was the third highest five-day total ever recorded there.

Yuma, Arizona's total of 2.44 inches of rain (62 mm) was their 2nd greatest January total ever, narrowly missing the record of 2.49 (63 mm) set in 1949. Their daily total of 1.95 (50 mm) inches on the 21st was the greatest one-day January total ever.

Near Wikieup, AZ, the Big Sandy River crested at 17.9 feet, washing away numerous roads and setting a new all-time record crest, breaking the previous record of 16.4 feet set back in March 1978.

Burlington, VT had its largest single snowstorm on record, 33.1" on Jan. 1 - 3.

Sioux City, IA tied its all-time max snow depth record (28" on Jan. 7).

Beckley, WV had its snowiest January on record (40.9"; old record 37.3" in 1996)

Bellingham, Washington tied its record highest January temperature of 65°F on January 11.

Hondo, Texas tied its record coldest January temperature of 12°F on January 9.

Cotulla la Salle, Texas tied its record coldest January temperature of 16°F on January 9.

Records were broken or tied at Daytona Beach, Orlando, Melbourne, and Vero Beach Florida for the greatest number of consecutive days in which the daily high temperature remained below 60 degrees F (15.5 C). Daytona Beach's string was twelve days.

Jackson, KY and London, KY tied their record for longest streak of consecutive days falling below 32°F (11 days). Pensacola, FL had its 2nd longest such streak (10 days), and Mobile, AL its 3rd longest (10 days).

Key West, FL had its 2nd coldest temperature ever measured, 42°F. The record is 41°F, set in 1981 and 1886.

Moderate El Niño conditions continue
Moderate El Niño conditions continue over the tropical Eastern Pacific. Ocean temperatures in the area 5°N - 5°S, 120°W - 170°W, also called the "Niña 3.4 region", were at 1.2°C above average on February 10, in the middle of the 1.0°C - 1.5°C range for a moderate El Niño, according to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology. The strength of El Niño has been roughly constant for the first two weeks of February. A burst of westerly winds that developed near the Date Line in January has pushed eastwards towards South America over the past month, and this should keep the current El Niño at moderate strength well into March. All of the El Niño models forecast that El Niño has peaked and will weaken by summer. Most of the models predict that El Niño conditions will last into early summer, but cross the threshold into neutral territory by the height of hurricane season.

January sea ice extent in the Arctic 4th lowest on record
January 2010 Northern Hemisphere sea ice extent was the 4th lowest since satellite measurements began in 1979. Ice extent was lower than in 2009 and 2008, but greater than in 2005, 2006, and 2007, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). The weather pattern over the Arctic in the first half of January 2010 featured a strongly negative Arctic Oscillation (AO). This pattern tends to slow the winds that typically flush large amounts of sea ice out of the Arctic between Greenland and Iceland. In this way, a negative AO could help retain some the second- and third-year ice through the winter, and potentially rebuild some of the older, multi-year ice that has been lost over the past few years. However, the ice pack is the thinnest on record for this time of year, and much above average temperatures this summer would likely cause a new record summertime sea ice loss.

Next post
My next post will be Monday or Tuesday.

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: 263 - 213

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog Index

Quoting Levi32:That's anyone's guess.

And I'm not trying to be hostile here so please don't. I like debating this.

No you don't!
You didn't even bother reading or watching the stuff i post.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Would you rather I bore you with a bunch of numbers that mean next to nothing because of all the controversy about data corruption and inaccuracy :)

Looking at the big picture yields a fresh perspective on things that makes so much sense when you think about it.


Perfect intro!

See the annual forest for the monthly trees. Repost from last night:

I can't stand monthly temps when it comes to this topic. It makes no sense, imo. Annual averages, based on a full trip around the sun, are the only valid measurement for assessment.

Here is that perspective:



Rotating Energy Reference: Maria D. Kazachenko et al 2009 ApJ 704 1146-1158

Rotating Record Reference: X. L. Yan et al 2008 ApJ 682 L65-L68

Temperature Reference: Dr. Roy Spencer, University of Alabama, Hunstville
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
You apparently miss the point of the discussion. Things which happend 55m years ago happen now 10 times faster.


You can't possibly expect people not to take scientists' opinions on what happened THAT long ago without a grain of salt. Come on...people aren't that dumb. It's all speculation.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
259. xcool
Member Since: September 26, 2009 Posts: 2 Comments: 15684
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy:
So the question is, why do so many global heating deniers, or skeptics, believe that the scientific community believed in global cooling in the 1970s when the exact opposite is true?
Money Money

CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY


Climate sceptics are recycled critics of controls on tobacco and acid rain

We must not be distracted from science's urgent message: we are fuelling dangerous changes in Earth's climate

In the weeks before and after the Copenhagen climate change conference last December, the science of climate change came under harsh attack by critics who contend that climate scientists have deliberately suppressed evidence — and that the science itself is severely flawed. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global group of experts charged with assessing the state of climate science, has been accused of bias.

The global public is disconcerted by these attacks. If experts cannot agree that there is a climate crisis, why should governments spend billions of dollars to address it?

The fact is that the critics — who are few in number but aggressive in their attacks — are deploying tactics that they have honed for more than 25 years. During their long campaign, they have greatly exaggerated scientific disagreements in order to stop action on climate change, with special interests like Exxon Mobil footing the bill.

Many books have recently documented the games played by the climate-change deniers. Merchants of Doubt, a new book by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway set for release in mid-2010, will be an authoritative account of their misbehaviour. The authors show that the same group of mischief-makers, given a platform by the free-market ideologues of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page, has consistently tried to confuse the public and discredit the scientists whose insights are helping to save the world from unintended environmental harm.

Today's campaigners against action on climate change are in many cases backed by the same lobbies, individuals, and organisations that sided with the tobacco industry to discredit the science linking smoking and lung cancer. Later, they fought the scientific evidence that sulphur oxides from coal-fired power plants were causing "acid rain." Then, when it was discovered that certain chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were causing the depletion of ozone in the atmosphere, the same groups launched a nasty campaign to discredit that science, too.

Later still, the group defended the tobacco giants against charges that second-hand smoke causes cancer and other diseases. And then, starting mainly in the 1980s, this same group took on the battle against climate change.

What is amazing is that, although these attacks on science have been wrong for 30 years, they still sow doubts about established facts. The truth is that there is big money backing the climate-change deniers, whether it is companies that don't want to pay the extra costs of regulation, or free-market ideologues opposed to any government controls.

The latest round of attacks involves two episodes. The first was the hacking of a climate-change research centre in England. The emails that were stolen suggested a lack of forthrightness in the presentation of some climate data. Whatever the details of this specific case, the studies in question represent a tiny fraction of the overwhelming scientific evidence that points to the reality and urgency of man-made climate change.

The second issue was a blatant error concerning glaciers that appeared in a major IPCC report. Here it should be understood that the IPCC issues thousands of pages of text. There are, no doubt, errors in those pages. But errors in the midst of a vast and complex report by the IPCC point to the inevitability of human shortcomings, not to any fundamental flaws in climate science.

When the emails and the IPCC error were brought to light, editorial writers at The Wall Street Journal launched a vicious campaign describing climate science as a hoax and a conspiracy. They claimed that scientists were fabricating evidence in order to obtain government research grants — a ludicrous accusation, I thought at the time, given that the scientists under attack have devoted their lives to finding the truth, and have certainly not become rich relative to their peers in finance and business.

But then I recalled that this line of attack — charging a scientific conspiracy to drum up "business" for science — was almost identical to that used by The Wall Street Journal and others in the past, when they fought controls on tobacco, acid rain, ozone depletion, second-hand smoke, and other dangerous pollutants. In other words, their arguments were systematic and contrived, not at all original to the circumstances.

We are witnessing a predictable process by ideologues and right-wing think tanks and publications to discredit the scientific process. Their arguments have been repeatedly disproved for 30 years — time after time — but their aggressive methods of public propaganda succeed in causing delay and confusion.

Climate change science is a wondrous intellectual activity. Great scientific minds have learned over the course of many decades to "read" the Earth's history, in order to understand how the climate system works. They have deployed brilliant physics, biology, and instrumentation (such as satellites reading detailed features of the Earth's systems) in order to advance our understanding.

And the message is clear: large-scale use of oil, coal, and gas is threatening the biology and chemistry of the planet. We are fuelling dangerous changes in Earth's climate and ocean chemistry, giving rise to extreme storms, droughts, and other hazards that will damage the food supply and the quality of life of the planet.

The IPCC and the climate scientists are telling us a crucial message. We need urgently to transform our energy, transport, food, industrial, and construction systems to reduce the dangerous human impact on the climate. It is our responsibility to listen, to understand the message, and then to act.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2010/feb/19/climate-change-sceptics-science
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Good evening folks! Hope all has been well in the Wunderground community. Just wanted to let those who visit my website, the CCHS Weather Center site, know that I will be updating the website sometime between tonight or tomorrow evening. During the next couple months, I will be working on creating a Youtube channel through which I will have video forecasts and tropical updates. I have not decided yet, but this may replace my website.

At this time, I'm keeping a keen eye on the computer models as there appears to be pretty decent consensus between the incoming 00Z GFS, the 00Z NAM, and the 12Z ECMWF in developing a rather strong storm complex over the SE GOM and coming across Southern Florida come late Monday evening into Tuesday morning due to a potent low level disturbance developing and riding an active subtropical jet across the area. Since both the GFS and NAM forecast soundings do support some weak instability, severe weather, primarily gusty winds and small hail, can't be ruled out. The 00Z NAM SE Composite Reflectivity shows the possible evolution of this storm very well and suggests possible heavy rainfall across Central and Southern Florida for Monday afternoon through late Tuesday morning. This will have to continue to be monitored.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Lol and who's gonna believe what people think happened 251 MILLION years ago?? You gotta be kidding me. That's anyone's guess.

And I'm not trying to be hostile here so please don't. I like debating this.
You apparently miss the point of the discussion. Things which happend 55m years ago happen now 10 times faster.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:
Last time it nearly did. (See the link i posted recently to the wiki).
But it seems no matter what people say, you have the answer.


Lol and who's gonna believe what people think happened 251 MILLION years ago?? You gotta be kidding me. That's anyone's guess.

And I'm not trying to be hostile here so please don't. I like debating this.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Levi thinks he can go to a supermarket and drive his SUV than.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting centex:
Does that mean your on side of <1% of scientist? Remember there are forces that have an interest in not believing the scientific fact and the US seems to lead in that area.


Not exactly --


31,486 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs



Wait to hear rebuttal with respect to the survey sample of the PHD's that negate this population of legitimate signers after the fact. Was it 26 in total/?

How may made the IPCC report? 52?
Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
NWS Dallas-Ft Worth, TX are ALL OVER the pending SNOW EVENT for TU 2/23/10:

000
FXUS64 KFWD 200401 AAC
AFDFWD

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION...UPDATED
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORT WORTH TX
1001 PM CST FRI FEB 19 2010

.UPDATE...
CURRENT FORECAST LOOKS ON TRACK AND ONLY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE WAS TO
ADD THE MENTION OF FOG AND DRIZZLE OVERNIGHT. THE 00Z FWD SOUNDING
SHOWS MOISTENING IN THE LOWER LEVELS OF THE ATMOSPHERE. AREAS OF
SPRINKLES MAY ALSO OCCUR BUT FOG AND DRIZZLE ARE EXPECTED TO BE
THE PREVAILING WEATHER FEATURE TONIGHT. NEW MODEL DATA STILL
DEPICTS AN ISOLATED THREAT FOR SEVERE WEATHER SUNDAY BUT THE
SEVERE PARAMETERS CONTINUE TO BE MARGINAL. THE NEW NAM ALSO
EXTENDS OUT TO THE MORNING OF 12Z TUESDAY AND IS VERY SIMILAR TO
THE GFS...SUPPORTING SNOW IN ITS MODEL SOUNDINGS AND TEMPERATURE
PROFILES. THE UPPER LEVEL FEATURES OF THE NAM CONTINUE TO BE
SLIGHTLY SLOWER THAN THE GFS REGARDING TUESDAYS SYSTEM...BUT AS
THE NEW 00Z GFS COMES IN AT THIS TIME /ONLY OUT TO MONDAY
MORNING SO FAR/ THE TWO MODELS ARE IN REMARKABLE AGREEMENT ON THE
TIMING OF FEATURES IN THE NEAR TERM FORECAST AND WILL EVALUATE THE
REMAINDER OF THE GFS AS IT COMES IN.

82/JLD
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting centex:
Sorry you’re on the side of heresy. The overwhelming peer reviewed research is one sided. Why do you guys believe the medicine man? It’s just ironic so many on blog which has author who believes in the evidence. Think it’s time this blog stopped quoting heretics.

You cannot be serious...so what would the temp trend be without us here, since everything is so solid?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Sure sea levels rise when ice melts, but that won't destroy all life on the planet lol. If you live on a beach, move inland a few miles! How hard is that?
Last time it nearly did. (See the link i posted recently to the wiki).
But it seems no matter what people say, you have the answer.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

I hope you acknowledge that the sea level been 120 metre back than. But hej reading your comments, this will be fun - if you survive the complications during the great flood! (back when all the ice melted)


Sure sea levels rise when ice melts, but that won't destroy all life on the planet lol. If you live on a beach, move inland a few miles! How hard is that?
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Quoting Ossqss:


Exactly!



Ya might want to do some more research on that of which you consider settled.
Sorry you’re on the side of heresy. The overwhelming peer reviewed research is one sided. Why do you guys believe the medicine man? It’s just ironic so many on blog which has author who believes in the evidence. Think it’s time this blog stopped quoting heretics.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
r.e. post #213-lotsa difference between "snow" and "ice caps", methinks- just an obs.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy:
OK Levi, if the measurements around Greenland were so poor and sketchy in the 1950s--then how can you possibly be sure that they would find the same (or similar) AMO measurements as today.

I mean really, how can you be sure you would find the same thing if the record is as bad as you say it is?


I can't, because like I said we've only had reliable records for a few decades. That in and of itself is enough to say that it's absurd to make wild conclusions about the sea ice patterns around Greenland when we've only observed maybe one short leg of the cycle, and we have no way of knowing if that will continue forever.

I'm not saying that we know for certain what happened in the 50s, but common sense tells me that significantly warming the Atlantic Ocean will melt more sea ice....that's plain and simple.

Why were people screaming in the 70s of a frozen ice age earth? I'll tell you why...the AMO and PDO were both cold...in other words most of the world's oceans were colder than normal. Glaciers GREW....now the AMO and PDO have been warm, and the glaciers are melting....wow?
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
In the past TWO days, the sub-20C zone of the Humboldt has been cut by 60%, and the 23C-line's distance from the coast has been reduced by half. In those same two days, the coldest temperature in the current has warmed from 14C to 16C. In fact the northwesternmost part of the 20C-line two days ago now stands at 22C.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
00Z GFS Run for 2-20-10
Surface Forecast @ 90HRS 12NOON CST 2-23-10

Map 00Z Run, same day and time 850MB Temps
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
240. xcool
snow for slidell la noooo
Member Since: September 26, 2009 Posts: 2 Comments: 15684
Quoting Levi32:


On the 1st point, it doesn't matter if dinosaurs were here 740,000 years ago or not, the point is those records, however far back they may go, show a far warmer earth at a point in our history than we even now fear could come to pass in the future.

I hope you acknowledge that the sea level been 120 metre back than. But hej reading your comments, this will be fun - if you survive the complications during the great flood! (back when all the ice melted)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting centex:
Does that mean your on side of <1% of scientist? Remember there are forces that have an interest in not believing the scientific fact and the US seems to lead in that area.


Your statistic of less than 1% is itself proof that propaganda is giving people the wrong idea. There are far more scientists than that on the other side of the issue.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Quoting StSimonsIslandGAGuy:
Levi, 2 observations:

Even if the earth warmed enough to melt the icecap.....who's to say that threatens life when the dinosaurs likely lived in an ice-free world...

Antarctic ice records show much higher concentrations of CO2 and higher temperatures back in the dinosaur age than anything we are dreaming of now.



Umm--Antarctic ice records only go back 740,000 years, not to 65 million years ago.

And if people were investigating Greenland back in the 1950s as intensely as they are today, they would have found the same thing.

Um, how could you possibly be sure?

And in fact, in the international polar geophysical year of 1957-1958, a lot of scientific research WAS done on Greenland ice and the currents around the island--and they found nothing like that.



On the 1st point, it doesn't matter if dinosaurs were here 740,000 years ago or not, the point is those records, however far back they may go, show a far warmer earth at a point in our history than we even now fear could come to pass in the future.

On the 2nd point, I don't dig up enough stuff to be able to refute that, and maybe it's true, but I do know the amount of data back in the 50s was pretty pathetic to the amount we have now, and it's hard to get an accurate picture of the state of the oceans back then.

Also now that I think about it, the Warm PDO/AMO intersection was in the 40s, and the PDO went cold in the 50s, so that may explain it. Greenland would have the best chance of significant melting back in the 40s when the earth was warming similarly to the way it has the last 30 years.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Look at the SSTs of the Gulf Stream and Humboldt (Peru) Current. This has changed greatly from yesterday when the situations mentioned below had not yet unfolded.



There is a 23C-line bulge pushing the north end of the sub-20C zone eastward, causing it to shrink. Normally the coolest part of the current is now 19C and further south there is a cooler pocket at 16C. At the Gulf Stream, a cold intrusion is pushing east at 40N and cutting off the main current.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


It never ends lol. I have never before entered the debate, although my opinion on GW has been known around here for years. Right now I have nothing better to do so I'm offering my side of the debate.
Does that mean your on side of <1% of scientist? Remember there are forces that have an interest in not believing the scientific fact and the US seems to lead in that area.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Wanna know why subtropical water is making it to Greenland? The Atlantic Ocean has been warmer than normal since the 1990s, due to a natural cycle, the AMO. And if people were investigating Greenland back in the 1950s as intensely as they are today, they would have found the same thing.


Exactly!

Quoting centex:
I'm always amazed when weather freaks on this blog think GW or CG is not happening. That argument ended long ago.


Ya might want to do some more research on that of which you consider settled.
Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
Quoting Levi32:


Wanna know why subtropical water is making it to Greenland? The Atlantic Ocean has been warmer than normal since the 1990s, due to a natural cycle, the AMO. And if people were investigating Greenland back in the 1950s as intensely as they are today, they would have found the same thing.


The Gulf Stream temporary diverted west of Greenland several times during January and February 2010, in case you missed it. It's not the amount of global warming itself as the RATE of change that's important. During the dinosaur age we had higher CO2, but of course we also had dinosaurs.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting centex:
I'm always amazed when weather freaks on this blog think GW or CG is not happening. That argument ended long ago.


It never ends lol. I have never before entered the debate, although my opinion on GW has been known around here for years. Right now I have nothing better to do so I'm offering my side of the debate.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
I'm always amazed when weather freaks on this blog think GW or CC is not happening. That argument ended long ago.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

"If there were a typo in The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin, would that nullify the theory of evolution?"


No, but if his data was insufficient in quantity (or amount of time observed) and in some cases falsified (like the GW scandals in Europe), then yes, the theory would lose credibility.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Quoting Levi32:


Would you rather I bore you with a bunch of numbers that mean next to nothing because of all the controversy about data corruption and inaccuracy :)

Looking at the big picture yields a fresh perspective on things that makes so much sense when you think about it.

"If there were a typo in The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin, would that nullify the theory of evolution?"
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:
Have a peek....

News Release : Team finds subtropical waters flushing through Greenland fjord



Wanna know why subtropical water is making it to Greenland? The Atlantic Ocean has been warmer than normal since the 1990s, due to a natural cycle, the AMO. And if people were investigating Greenland back in the 1950s as intensely as they are today, they would have found the same thing.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Quoting drg0dOwnCountry:

This was from an article in times magazine, which was not very scientific.


Would you rather I bore you with a bunch of numbers that mean next to nothing because of all the controversy about data corruption and inaccuracy :)

Looking at the big picture yields a fresh perspective on things that makes so much sense when you think about it.
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Have a peek....

News Release : Team finds subtropical waters flushing through Greenland fjord

Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188
Invest 94P is in the bottom-left corner of this animation:

Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Quoting Levi32:


Oh yeah it's complicated, but at the same time so simple. With this many variations and variables that people bring in to the equation, you can pretty much make a case for anything if you say it right. People try to deny it but 30 years ago they were talking about an ice age creating a frozen planet...lol. Guess why? Cold PDO + Cold AMO....same logic....cold oceans = more sea ice = colder earth average temperature = more glaciers etc etc etc...

This was from an article in times magazine, which was not very scientific.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Ossqss:
Humm ?


Heh, no-se Jo-way
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
220. HadesGodWyvern (Mod)
Meteo-France Regional Special Meteorological Center
CYCLONE TROPICALE GELANE (12-20092010)
7:00 AM Réunion February 20 2010
===========================================

Pre-Cyclone Alert for Réunion Island - Yellow Alert

At 3:00 AM UTC, Tropical Cyclone Gelane (965 hPa) located at 18.6S 61.6E has 10 minute sustained winds of 80 knots with gusts of 115 knots.
Member Since: May 24, 2006 Posts: 52 Comments: 46525
Quoting flsky:

Why has this become a red-state, blue-state issue? Aren't there larger things to consider?


Oh yeah it's complicated, but at the same time so simple. With this many variations and variables that people bring in to the equation, you can pretty much make a case for anything if you say it right. People try to deny it but 30 years ago they were talking about an ice age creating a frozen planet...lol. Guess why? Cold PDO Cold AMO in the 1960s and 1970s....same logic....cold oceans = more sea ice = colder earth average temperature = more glaciers etc etc etc...
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Quoting Ossqss:
Humm ?



That's not much less ice considering the warm PDO and warm AMO intersection since the late 90s. Warm world oceans = less ice = warmer earth average temperature. What a revelation.... =)
Member Since: November 24, 2005 Posts: 635 Comments: 26697
Snow over 12 hours





Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Levi32:


Even if the earth warmed enough to melt the icecap.....who's to say that threatens life when the dinosaurs likely lived in an ice-free world...

Antarctic ice records show much higher concentrations of CO2 and higher temperatures back in the dinosaur age than anything we are dreaming of now.

Yes, but it was also warmer back than.
And during such events, the ocean collapses - becomes acid. FOod chain gone ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian-Triassic_extinction_event
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
214. flsky
Quoting Levi32:


Even if the earth warmed enough to melt the icecap.....who's to say that threatens life when the dinosaurs likely lived in an ice-free world...

Antarctic ice records show much higher concentrations of CO2 and higher temperatures back in the dinosaur age than anything we are dreaming of now.

Why has this become a red-state, blue-state issue? Aren't there larger things to consider?
Member Since: October 24, 2006 Posts: 0 Comments: 2089
Humm ?

Member Since: June 12, 2005 Posts: 6 Comments: 8188

Viewing: 263 - 213

Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17Blog 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.

Local Weather

Overcast
48 °F
Overcast