Survey says: 97% of climate scientists agree that humans cause global warming

By: Dr. Jeff Masters , 4:14 PM GMT on May 07, 2013

Share this Blog
40
+

Two studies done in 2009 and 2010 found that 97% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that humans cause global warming. But what would a larger sample of the scientific literature show, extended all the way up to 2011? You're invited to help find out, by participating in an anonymous 10-minute survey where you will be reading the abstracts (summaries) of ten randomly selected technical papers on Earth's climate published between 1991 and 2011. The survey was created by physicist John Cook of The Global Change Institute at Australia's University of Queensland. Mr. Cook is the creator of one of my favorite climate change websites, skepticalscience.com. He authored one of our special Earth Day 2013 essays, Closing the Consensus Gap on Climate Change, from which I have pulled Figure 1 below. Mr. Cook is lead author on a new paper called "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature," to be published in the next month or so in Environmental Research Letters. The paper analyzes the same papers included in the survey you're asked to participate in, and the researchers plan to compare the results. Each of these 11,944 papers written by 29,083 authors and published in 1,980 journals included the keywords "global warming" or "global climate change" in their listing in the ISI Web of Science database. After reading each abstract, you will be asked to rate the level of endorsement within the abstract for the proposition that human activity (i.e., anthropogenic greenhouse gases) is causing global warming. There will be these choices available on a drop-down menu for you to choose from:

1. Explicit Endorsement with Quantification: abstract explicitly states that humans are causing more than half of global warming.
2. Explicit Endorsement without Quantification: abstract explicitly states humans are causing global warming or refers to anthropogenic global warming/climate change as a given fact.
3. Implicit Endorsement: abstract implies humans are causing global warming. E.g., research assumes greenhouse gases cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause.
4. Neutral: abstract doesn't address or mention issue of what's causing global warming.
5. Implicit Rejection: abstract implies humans have had a minimal impact on global warming without saying so explicitly. E.g., proposing a natural mechanism is the main cause of global warming.
6. Explicit Rejection without Quantification: abstract explicitly minimizes or rejects that humans are causing global warming.
7. Explicit Rejection with Quantification: abstract explicitly states that humans are causing less than half of global warming.
8. Don't know.

When you are all done, the survey will let you know how your average score for the ten papers compares to the rating given by the authors. The survey took me about 8 minutes to complete, and it was interesting to see the tremendous diversity of research being done on global warming in my random sample. I'll post about Mr. Cook's results when his paper is published in the next few months.


Figure 1. Two recent studies have sought to measure the level of agreement in the scientific community in different ways and arrived at strikingly consistent results. A 2009 study led by Peter Doran surveyed over 3,000 Earth scientists and found that as the scientists' expertise in climate change grew, so did the level of agreement about human-caused global warming. For the most qualified experts, climate scientists actively publishing peer-reviewed research, there was 97% agreement. Alternatively, a 2010 analysis led by William Anderegg compiled a database of scientists from public declarations on climate change, both supporting and rejecting the consensus. Among scientists who had published peer-reviewed climate research, there was 97% agreement. However, it is worth pointing out that science is not decided by majority vote. This is articulated concisely by John Reisman who says: "Science is not a democracy. It is a dictatorship. It is evidence that does the dictating." Figure and text taken from Mr. John Cook's special Earth Day essay, Closing the Consensus Gap on Climate Change.

Thanks for participating!

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: 227 - 177

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

Quoting allahgore:




This site was created by John Cook. I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist and web programmer by trade. I did a Physics degree at the University of Queensland and while I achieved First Class Honours and could've continued onto a PhD, I instead quit academia and became a professional scrawler. Too much doodling in lectures.


NEA i think this is what snowlover is talking about.

This is interesting. He is listed as a POST doctoral fellow at this site, same picture, albeit a bit older. I guess you have to be really careful in which dated internet file you use. Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MississippiWx:


And commence Gulf heating. :-)
Any of you guys have a good link for analysis and discussion of GOM surface and subsurface heating with respect to insolation, air temp, cloud cover, current flow from the Caribbean into the loop current, dynamics of GOM warm and cold-core eddy currente, etc.

I know that the sea surface can warm quickly in calm weather and in the absence of currents to carry the heat away. Also, I am aware that powerful hurricanes depend on heat to a fair depth for to "fuel" their growth and sustain their winds.

In light of the cool spring and lots of cloud cover, what are the 3D (not just surface) temps and heat content, and how might we expect to see temps and heat content increase over the next few weeks? How long could we expect it to take for GOM and Caribbean heat content levels to increase to the levels needed to propagate and fuel hurricanes to major status? How predictable is the GOM loop current and its eddies?

(Even in asking questions, I am boggled by the complexity of tropical cyclonic systems and the conditions that they require to exist!)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting allahgore:



If it's settled science, why is it that we are still using taxpayer money to continue AGW studies?

Settled doesn't mean completely known. No scientific theory is complete, or known with 100% certainty. Additional study of some aspect of any scientific theory, whether it is the Germ Theory of disease, the Atomic Theory of matter, or the AGW Theory of climate is worthwhile. At worst, it will confirm what we know. At best, we will understand better what we know or even extend our knowledge.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Quoting Dakster:


Sorta... But that doesn't mean I want a hot gulf this early and a storm this early regardless.

You're boring.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Water dog. WASSUP!!!!

Long time no hear from, hope the weather is good in your kneck of the Florida woods.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
(I won't address the rest of your comment, as I skipped it; since you were so wrong in your first paragraph, I didn't bother reading the rest.)

Oh gurrrl, no he Dint

-oh yes he DID!-

SNAP!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting spathy:




Sorta... But that doesn't mean I want a hot gulf this early and a storm this early regardless.

Don;t get me wrong, I like watching the storms, I just don't want a front seat. (I don't want anyone else to either)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Snowlover123:
Several comments to Dr. Masters' post.

Firstly, John Cook does not have a Ph.D, as Dr. Masters had written that he had. All I had previously read was that he "studied physics" before he quit college because he was "doodling too much."
Again--and this is almost becoming a habit--your sources are lying to you. Cook graduated from the University of Queensland in Australia with a degree in physics, after which he majored in solar physics during his post-grad honors year. No, he is not a climate scientist, nor does he claim to be. But his formal higher education certainly included more than "studying physics" and "doodling too much".*

(I won't address the rest of your comment, as I skipped it; since you were so wrong in your first paragraph that I simply didn't bother reading the rest.)

* - For what it's worth, since his website can't and doesn't rely on his own findings--you know, like Goddard, Watts, and McIntyre do in their pursuit of blog "science"--he insists that any and all dialog revolve around only peer-reviewed scientific articles. No blog science or unsupported personal opinions allowed.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting TropicalAnalystwx13:

Yeah. It's not going to last though. The CFS has a return of above-average trades by mid-month.


Uff, strong trade winds in whole atlantic ocean.....

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Several comments to Dr. Masters' post.

Firstly, John Cook does not have a Ph.D, as Dr. Masters had written that he had. All I had previously read was that he "studied physics" before he quit college because he was "doodling too much."

Secondly, the Doran and Zimmerman 2009 study doesn't address anything. All it established was that 97% of Climate Scientists believe that Humans have some role in the warming. 97% said that humans were a "significant contributing factor." Nowhere in the study did it quantify what "significant" was. Was it 10%, 33%, 50%, or 75% of the warming? Different scientists have different definitions of what significant is. I'm certain that the study lumped skeptics in the 97%, because skeptics believe that humans contribute, but also believe that natural factors significantly contribute as well. Heldson 2009 raised this concern in a comment:

The feature article “Examining the scientific consensus on climate change,” by Peter Doran and Maggie Kendall Zimmerman (see Eos, 90(3), 20 January 2009), while interesting, has a primary flaw that calls their interpretation into question. In their opening sentence, the authors state that on the basis of polling data, “47% [of Americans] think climate scientists agree… that human activities are a major cause of that [global] warming….” They then described the two-question survey they had posed to a large group of Earth scientists and scientifically literate (I presume) people in related fields. While the polled group is important, in any poll the questions are critical. My point revolves around their question 2, to wit, “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” Note that the opening sentence of their article uses the phrase “major cause” in reporting the results of the polling, while the poll itself used the phrase “significant contributing factor.” There is a large difference between these two phrases.



Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MississippiWx:
Now we're cooking with fire. MDR anomalies are making a comeback. +0.71C



Anomaly trend over the past 7 days:


Yeah. It's not going to last though. The CFS has a return of above-average trades by mid-month.
Member Since: July 6, 2010 Posts: 113 Comments: 32690
Quoting aspectre:
165 PedleyCA: What dialect or language is that?

Ada Monzon, Jefa de Meteorologia del Centro Meteoroligico del Caribe
That's what Google and GoogleTranslate are for


Google translate doesn't do anything with those words. I finally did just Google it. Lots of funny stuff related to her. I don't speak Spanish so not a clue but some of it was hilarious.


Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Now we're cooking with fire. MDR anomalies are making a comeback. +0.71C



Anomaly trend over the past 7 days:

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
165 PedleyCA: What dialect or language is that?

Ada Monzón, Jefa de Meteorología del Centro Meteorológico del Caribe, is on Twitter
Member Since: August 21, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 4860
190 allahgore: If it's settled science, why is it that we are still using taxpayer money to continue AGW studies?

Planes fly, why is there NASA funding for aeronautics?
The ocean and atmosphere exist, why is there NOAA funding?
Hurricanes happen. Why is the NHC allowed to continue to exist?
There are lots interesting and important details yet to be fully explored and explained.
Member Since: August 21, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 4860
Quoting MAweatherboy1:
Good afternoon. Sorry if this was posted but the 12z CMC showed a nice storm in the East Pac towards the end of its run, more than what it would normally show even with its bias to create non-existent storms.



CMC Also has a 1009 Mb low in the Atlantic :
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Dakster:


Great, just what we need with a possible developing TC... A nice warm Gulf.


It's over two weeks out, and it's May. No need to get too concerned just yet.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Imma make a new one of that chart... 1900-2012 here I go lol
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting MississippiWx:


And commence Gulf heating. :-)


Great, just what we need with a possible developing TC... A nice warm Gulf.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting CybrTeddy:
Looks like FL will be warming up to normal this week. Calling for 85 degrees tomorrow, 90 degrees Friday.


And commence Gulf heating. :-)
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting Stormchaser2007:
If we get this kind of VPA over the Atlantic during the first week or two of June, I would pretty much guarantee that we see our first named system (possibly in both the ATL and EPAC)

The reason I say June and not late May is due to the fact the GFS has been WAY too progressive other the past 5 months with the MJO. The CFS v2 has a nice pulse moving through around June as well, so this is something to check up on every few days until then.

We'll see what happens...



Nice to see you around, StormChaser. It has been a while. And I agree, I've been watching that area the past week or so. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting AtHomeInTX:
Still there. Look out NC?


Check out the thickness field associated with it. Very cold core. With that system dropping down from the arctic like that, it would have to spend a large amount of time over the Gulf Stream to reverse its thermal profile, which doesn't happen this run.

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Three more flood advisories.

FLOOD ADVISORY
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
445 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

PRC119-072345-
/O.NEW.TJSJ.FA.Y.0053.130507T2045Z-130507T2345Z/
/00000.N.ER.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000 Z.OO/
RIO GRANDE PR-
445 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SAN JUAN HAS ISSUED AN

* URBAN AND SMALL STREAM FLOOD ADVISORY
FOR THE FOLLOWING MUNICIPALITY...

IN PUERTO RICO
RIO GRANDE

* UNTIL 745 PM AST

* AT 444 PM AST...HEAVY RAINFALL OVER THE PAST HOUR HAS RESULTED IN
SHARP RISES OVER THE ESPIRITU SANTO RIVER IN RIO GRANDE. EXPECT
FLASH FLOODING ALONG LYING AREAS OF THE RIVER.

MOST FLOOD DEATHS OCCUR IN AUTOMOBILES. NEVER DRIVE YOUR VEHICLE INTO
AREAS WHERE THE WATER COVERS THE ROADWAY. FLOOD WATERS ARE USUALLY
DEEPER THAN THEY APPEAR. JUST ONE FOOT OF FLOWING WATER IS POWERFUL
ENOUGH TO SWEEP VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD. WHEN ENCOUNTERING FLOODED
ROADS MAKE THE SMART CHOICE...TURN AROUND...DONT DROWN.

&&

LAT...LON 1844 6583 1841 6581 1842 6577 1840 6576
1836 6577 1832 6575 1828 6577 1829 6579
1827 6583 1830 6586 1840 6587 1842 6590
1844 6587

$$

ROSA

------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------
FLOOD ADVISORY
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
438 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

PRC011-097-117-072330-
/O.NEW.TJSJ.FA.Y.0052.130507T2038Z-130507T2330Z/
/00000.N.ER.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000 Z.OO/
ANASCO PR-RINCON PR-MAYAGUEZ PR-
438 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SAN JUAN HAS ISSUED AN

* URBAN AND SMALL STREAM FLOOD ADVISORY
FOR THE FOLLOWING MUNICIPALITIES...

IN PUERTO RICO
ANASCO...RINCON AND MAYAGUEZ

* UNTIL 730 PM AST

* AT 436 PM AST...DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS
WITH VERY HEAVY RAIN OVER WESTERN PUERTO RICO. ONE TO TWO INCHES PER
HOUR ARE LIKELY WITH THESE SHOWERS. THIS WILL CAUSE FLOODING OF
URBAN AND POOR DRAINAGE AREAS.

MOST FLOOD DEATHS OCCUR IN AUTOMOBILES. NEVER DRIVE YOUR VEHICLE INTO
AREAS WHERE THE WATER COVERS THE ROADWAY. FLOOD WATERS ARE USUALLY
DEEPER THAN THEY APPEAR. JUST ONE FOOT OF FLOWING WATER IS POWERFUL
ENOUGH TO SWEEP VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD. WHEN ENCOUNTERING FLOODED
ROADS MAKE THE SMART CHOICE...TURN AROUND...DONT DROWN.

&&

LAT...LON 1815 6796 1836 6729 1834 6726 1810 6783
1811 6794 1808 6795 1805 6787 1833 6727
1828 6720 1815 6716 1819 6702 1826 6710
1828 6704 1831 6708 1831 6718 1838 6724
1839 6749 1839 6750 1836 6728

$$

ROSA

------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------
FLOOD ADVISORY
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
427 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

PRC021-033-061-127-135-137-072330-
/O.NEW.TJSJ.FA.Y.0051.130507T2027Z-130507T2330Z/
/00000.N.ER.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000 Z.OO/
BAYAMON PR-GUAYNABO PR-SAN JUAN PR-TOA ALTA PR-TOA BAJA PR-CATANO PR-
427 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SAN JUAN HAS ISSUED AN

* URBAN AND SMALL STREAM FLOOD ADVISORY
FOR THE FOLLOWING MUNICIPALITIES...

IN PUERTO RICO
BAYAMON...GUAYNABO...SAN JUAN...TOA ALTA...TOA BAJA AND CATANO

* UNTIL 730 PM AST

* AT 425 PM AST...DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS
WITH HEAVY RAIN WITH ONE TO TWO INCHES PER HOUR. EXPECT FLOODING OF
URBAN AND POOR DRAINAGE AREAS ESPECIALLY IN BAYAMON AND GUAYNABO.

MOST FLOOD DEATHS OCCUR IN AUTOMOBILES. NEVER DRIVE YOUR VEHICLE INTO
AREAS WHERE THE WATER COVERS THE ROADWAY. FLOOD WATERS ARE USUALLY
DEEPER THAN THEY APPEAR. JUST ONE FOOT OF FLOWING WATER IS POWERFUL
ENOUGH TO SWEEP VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD. WHEN ENCOUNTERING FLOODED
ROADS MAKE THE SMART CHOICE...TURN AROUND...DONT DROWN.

&&

LAT...LON 1846 6617 1848 6614 1847 6609 1835 6607
1838 6624 1840 6624 1840 6625 1842 6626
1845 6626 1845 6623 1848 6619

$$

ROSA
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14757
Looks like FL will be warming up to normal this week. Calling for 85 degrees tomorrow, 90 degrees Friday.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Seriously, I was expecting more from the band of moisture crossing the NE Caribbean. Not even 1 inch in most areas. The rain definitely hates the northernmost Lesser Antilles.



2013 is a complete bust so far for the rain lovers in the Northern Leewards.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting angelafritz:
I also will mention that as a scientist, I've seen a lot of research abstracts that do *not* get at the heart of their conclusions.

Some authors like to veil their results so that the person has to read the paper.

Some authors just assume that people will understand that when they say "climate change" people will know what they mean.

If anything, I'd imagine an important result of this study will be that scientists need to be more clear about the science/research they're trying to communicate. They shouldn't expect people to understand what they're saying. I think it's why there's so many mistranslations of science in the media.


Thanks Angela..
Member Since: August 13, 2009 Posts: 13 Comments: 6910
Quoting barbamz:
BBC weather video: India swelters in the heat (up to 113°F, ykes)
with a look at the possible two cyclones in the Indian Ocean.

I have to call it a night. All the best!


Good Night barb.. :)
Member Since: August 13, 2009 Posts: 13 Comments: 6910
Quoting Gearsts:
Private?


sorry just fixed it! thanks for telling me Gearst!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Good afternoon. Sorry if this was posted but the 12z CMC showed a nice storm in the East Pac towards the end of its run, more than what it would normally show even with its bias to create non-existent storms.

Member Since: February 11, 2012 Posts: 84 Comments: 7995
Quoting PRweathercenter:
Weather Update May 7th 2013
img src="">
Private?
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Weather Update May 7th 2013
img src="">

Link
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Deleted for being less than helpful. ie I shoulda checked before posting my (t)witticism.
Member Since: August 21, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 4860
FLASH FLOOD WARNING
PRC013-141-080015-
/O.NEW.TJSJ.FF.W.0007.130507T2018Z-130508T0015Z/
/00000.0.ER.000000T0000Z.000000T0000Z.000000T0000 Z.OO/

BULLETIN - EAS ACTIVATION REQUESTED
FLASH FLOOD WARNING
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
418 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SAN JUAN HAS ISSUED A

* FLASH FLOOD WARNING FOR...
THE FOLLOWING MUNICIPALITIES

IN PUERTO RICO
UTUADO
ARECIBO

* UNTIL 815 PM AST

* AT 418 PM AST...NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE DOPPLER RADAR INDICATED
SHOWERS AND THUNDERSTORMS MOVING REPEATEDLY OVER UTUADO AND ARECIBO
WITH ONE AND HALF INCH PER HOUR RAINFALL RATES. SEVERAL TRIBUTARIES
OF THE RIO GRANDE ARECIBO ARE RISING SHARPLY AND WILL LIKELY FLOOD
IN THE NEXT HOUR OR SO. EXPECT FLOODING ALONG LOW LYING AREAS OF RIO
LIMON AND TANAMA AND POSSIBLY LATER ON THE RIO GRANDE DE ARECIBO.

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

A FLASH FLOOD WARNING MEANS THAT FLOODING IS IMMINENT OR OCCURRING.
IF YOU ARE IN THE WARNING AREA MOVE TO HIGHER GROUND IMMEDIATELY.
RESIDENTS LIVING ALONG STREAMS AND CREEKS SHOULD TAKE IMMEDIATE
PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT LIFE AND PROPERTY. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO CROSS
SWIFTLY FLOWING WATERS OR WATERS OF UNKNOWN DEPTH BY FOOT OR BY
AUTOMOBILE.

&&

LAT...LON 1847 6658 1836 6658 1832 6661 1830 6657
1824 6660 1824 6663 1815 6667 1817 6666
1821 6669 1822 6674 1825 6678 1823 6680
1824 6683 1832 6683 1832 6677 1849 6676
1848 6671 1850 6660

$$

ROSA

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND AT /USE LOWER CASE LETTERS/:
HTTP://WWW.WEATHER.GOV/SANJUAN
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14757
things are slowly coming in line as the season approaches

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Quoting spathy:
"Science is not a democracy. It
is a dictatorship. It is evidence that does the dictating." Figure and
text taken from Dr. John Cook's special Earth Day essay, Closing the Consensus Gap on Climate Change.

When the evidence is only allowed review and publishing by what looks like and acts like a complete Oligarchy,its obvious why there is a 97% agreement.
The other 3% is only published for show and or ease of refuting.


WU Mail sir!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
185. angelafritz (Admin)
I also will mention that as a scientist, I've seen a lot of research abstracts that do *not* get at the heart of their conclusions.

Some authors like to veil their results so that the person has to read the paper.

Some authors just assume that people will understand that when they say "climate change" people will know what they mean.

If anything, I'd imagine an important result of this study will be that scientists need to be more clear about the science/research they're trying to communicate. They shouldn't expect people to understand what they're saying. I think it's why there's so many mistranslations of science in the media.
Quoting Tropicsweatherpr:
Hi Nrt,any news that may be important that came out of the Governors Hurricane Conference?


Not yet, just prepare, prepare, prepare



Hurricane director: Prepare as though one will hit


Excerpt:

Will the federal sequester hurt the hurricane center?

The center is going to deliver on its mission during this hurricane season, no matter what. We are going to provide the forecasts and warnings that people need. Even if, for example, furloughs were actually to take place, if there’s a big hurricane on our doorstep, those can be canceled.
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
183. angelafritz (Admin)
These are my results. I can't wait to see the full analysis. John Cook is doing fantastic work.

"Of the 10 papers that you rated, your average rating was 3.7 (to put that number into context, 1 represents endorsement of AGW, 7 represents rejection of AGW and 4 represents no position). The average rating of the 10 papers by the authors of the papers was 3.1."
If we get this kind of VPA over the Atlantic during the first week or two of June, I would pretty much guarantee that we see our first named system (possibly in both the ATL and EPAC)

The reason I say June and not late May is due to the fact the GFS has been WAY too progressive other the past 5 months with the MJO. The CFS v2 has a nice pulse moving through around June as well, so this is something to check up on every few days until then.

We'll see what happens...

Member Since: Posts: Comments:
Here in Wilmington NC, this is the first sunny day we have had in a few days
Member Since: April 26, 2006 Posts: 5 Comments: 3222
PR can expect more scattered showers with flooding possible in the next couple of days.

AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
346 PM AST TUE MAY 7 2013

.SYNOPSIS...AT UPPER LEVELS...A SERIES OF SHORT WAVE TROUGHS WILL MOVE
JUST TO THE NORTH AND THROUGH THE AREA TONIGHT THROUGH SUNDAY WITH
WEST SOUTHWEST WINDS TURNING WEST NORTHWEST ON FRIDAY. ZONAL FLOW
RETURNS WITH THE JET TO THE NORTH AFTER A WEAK RIDGE PASSES ON
TUESDAY MORNING.

AT MID LEVELS...HIGH PRESSURE DOMINATES THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN AND
THE WESTERN TROPICAL ATLANTIC UNTIL THE END OF THE WEEK. LATE IN
THE WEEK A SERIES OF SHORT WAVE TROUGHS PASS JUST NORTH OF AND
OVER THE LOCAL AREA AND TROUGHING CONTINUES INTO EARLY NEXT WEEK.

AT LOWER LEVELS...HIGH PRESSURE IN THE WEST CENTRAL ATLANTIC WILL
BUILD AND DOMINATE THE ATLANTIC WHILE SENDING A RIDGE INTO
FLORIDA. THIS WILL BRING THE NORMAL TRADE WIND FLOW BACK TO THE
AREA BY WEDNESDAY.

&&

.DISCUSSION...VERY HEAVY RAIN FELL OVER PUERTO RICO THIS
AFTERNOON...SOME OF WHICH WAS NOT VISIBLE ON THE AVAILABLE RADAR.
AREAS UNDER REPORTED WERE OROCOVIS AND BARRANQUITAS WHERE VARIOUS
SMALL STREAMS WERE RUNNING OUT OF THEIR BANKS. AT THE TIME OF
WRITING RIO DE LA PLATA AT COMERIO WAS ONE FOOT ABOVE FLOOD STAGE
WHILE A FEW OTHER RIVERS HAD RISEN SIGNIFICANTLY...INCLUDING RIO
CIBUCO...RIO LIMON AND RIO GRANDE DE ARECIBO. FLOODING WAS ALSO
REPORTED ON THE RIO GUATEMALA. A NEW WAVE OF SHOWERS WAS MOVING
NORTHWEST FROM YABUCOA AND NAGUABO AND WILL ENTER THE GREATER
METROPOLITAN AREA OF SAN JUAN BEFORE 4 PM AST. BEST RAINFALL
AMOUNTS AS OF 3:11 PM WERE 3.18 INCHES AT GUAJATACA AND 3.11
INCHES IN VILLALBA AND 2.05 INCHES IN UTUADO. SHOWERS ARE EXPECTED
TO ABATE SOME LATER THIS EVENING...BUT OTHER SHOWERS WERE
INDICATED IN THE MODELS FOR THE SOUTHEAST COAST OF PUERTO RICO AND
THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS LATER TONIGHT. VERY HEAVY RAIN WAS
EXPECTED TO THE NORTHEAST OF THE AREA OVER THE ATLANTIC AS THIS
BAND OF MOISTURE CONTINUES TO THE NORTH.

DRIER AIR WAS MOVING THROUGH THE LEEWARD AND WINDWARD ISLANDS
TOWARD THE AREA TODAY...BUT A BAND OF MOISTURE THAT EXTENDS INTO
THE MID ATLANTIC IS SAGGING SOUTH AND WILL PUSH ACROSS THE AREA ON
WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY...INTERACTING WITH THE SHORT WAVES
MENTIONED ABOVE TO BRING ANOTHER ROUND OF SHOWERS AND
THUNDERSTORMS. PATCHES OF DRY AIR THEN MOVE THROUGH FRIDAY THROUGH
SUNDAY WITH PULSES OF MOISTURE BRINGING SOME ADDITIONAL SHOWERS
AND THUNDERSTORMS...BUT EXPECT BETTER SHOWERS AFTER THE WEEKEND.

&&

.AVIATION...SHRA AND TSRA ARE EXPECTED WITH MOUNTAIN OBSCURATIONS
AND MVFR/IFR CONDITIONS IN HEAVY RAIN UNTIL AT LEAST
07/22Z...CONDITIONS WILL IMPROVE OVER PR BUT SCT SHRA WITH ISOLD
TSRA WILL CONTINUE OVER EASTERN PR AND THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
WITH OCNL MVFR THROUGH 07/10Z. EXPECT WORST CONDITIONS NORTHEAST
OF PUERTO RICO OVER THE ATLANTIC.

&&

.MARINE...SEAS ARE INCREASING SLOWLY DUE TO NORTHEAST SWELL. AS
WINDS INCREASE WEDNESDAY THROUGH FRIDAY SEAS WILL ALSO INCREASE IN
THE CARIBBEAN. AT THIS TIME SEAS ARE EXPECTED TO REMAIN BELOW 7
FEET THROUGH SUNDAY.

&&

.PRELIMINARY POINT TEMPS/POPS...
SJU 77 87 77 86 / 50 50 50 50
STT 77 87 77 85 / 50 50 40 40
Member Since: April 29, 2009 Posts: 75 Comments: 14757
Toronto Pearson Int'l Airport
Date: 4:00 PM EDT Tuesday 7 May 2013
Condition:Mainly Sunny
Pressure:30.0 inches
Tendency:falling
Visibility:15 miles
Temperature:74.1°F
Dewpoint:35.1°F
Humidity:24%
Wind:ESE 10 mph
Member Since: Posts: Comments:
BBC weather video: India swelters in the heat (up to 113°F, ykes)
with a look at the possible two cyclones in the Indian Ocean.

I have to call it a night. All the best!
Member Since: Posts: Comments:

Viewing: 227 - 177

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

Light Rain
48 °F
Light Rain