Click for source image
No red dots on this map. The map above appears to be representing Weather Service Forecast Office forecast zones, though I’m not absolutely sure since no reference is included with the map. If so, then each of these divisions is an area where a Zone Forecast is issued for. These are what we see as our regular daily forecasts on TV, Newspapers, and Radio. The map above is from NCDC’s research section and was brought to my attention by WUWT commenter “pearlandaggie”.
Update: It turns out they are “climate divisions” see here with thanks to Basil.
The public hasn’t been widely exposed to the map above. The map below is what was in the latest press release.
If we just look at the month of December, the USA still looks cooler than normal or near normal for the most part, with the southeast USA being the exception:
Click for source image
NOAA says in the press release:
South Carolina and Georgia had their sixth and eighth, respectively, warmest December on record.
The first map was not part of the press release, the second one was. I wonder why NOAA chose not to include a yearly map presentation like the first one above from their research section, but only chose to show one for December 2008 even though the title of the press release was:
NOAA: 2008 Temperature for U.S. Near Average, was Coldest Since 1997; Below Average for December
It would seem to me that if you run a press release about the entire year of 2008, you’d put in a map for 2008 also. It’s not like they didn’t have one available.
To their credit, they did include the time series, but as my years of television experience have told me, that isn’t often as easily interpreted by the general public.
Here is what the CONUS temperature time series looks like with 2008 added, as included in the press release:
NOAA says in their press release:
For 2008, the average temperature of 53.0 degrees F was 0.2 degree above the 20th Century average.
In other words; near normal.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Looks like Texas needs to be broken into about 4 more pieces. maybe more. The one ‘cooler’ part from Texarkana on the Arkansas border to outside Houston is a MASSIVE area covering swamps, forests, grasslands, and just about every other condition possible.
Looks like the hockey stick went limp.
Noted that Long Island is the only “Much Above Normal” section in the country. Maybe that has to do with the media’s hysteria over AGW??
Meanwhile, been praying to the weather gods that the mother of all blizzards hits DC next Tuesday. Not likely, but that would definately cause The One to strike any passages about the need to address Global Warming from his speech. ^_^
Near, but below, normal. Waddya bet Long Island is one giant Urban Heat Island. Downwind as it is from the West.
======================================
And, quid pro quo, shows a warmer Siberia and a warmer Europe (except England, France and Spain). But that will be subject for another post, I presume.
REPLY: actually we covered that back in October…the Siberian anomaly is in question – Anthony
Tarnsman (09:02:46) :
Meanwhile, been praying to the weather gods that the mother of all blizzards hits DC next Tuesday. Not likely, but that would definately cause The One to strike any passages about the need to address Global Warming from his speech. ^_^
Not a chance. It will be confirmation of the instability of the climate system caused by human emissions of CO2
DaveE.
A bit of discussion in the comments regarding this at Lucia’s blog here: http://rankexploits.com/musings/2009/giss-temp-jan-20010-dec-2008/
See! I’m getting the hang of this AGW stuff. 😛
DaveE.
From the Associated Press:
What imbeciles. They actually believe they can regulate climate through legislation. Term limits, PLEASE!
This kind of behaviour about show how is climate and temperature is much better than in Spain.
The internet-newspaper most read in spanish: “el Mundo” has changed his strategy. Now global climate is not warming, …. is changing.
In this article in spanish
http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2009/01/09/clima/1231524398.html
they explain the cold winter with the previous warming:
” .. . When the Pole is hotter (ie, having gone from -30 C to -22 º C), with climate change, the polar jet, the air flowing river 11 kilometers high, is a few hundred kilometers to the North did so in 1960, for example. . so that meanders just come on stream when Spain are very deep, very deep and are sudden and intense.”
If climate is warmer, it’s because antropogenic global warming. If it’s colder, too.
Isn’t it funny how the perceieved warming trend over the last 25 – 30 years coincide with the beginning of satellite records for sea ice? It’s even more prevelent on NCDC’s global climate summary page. Look at the global mean temperature over land and ocean graph. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2008/ann/global-jan-dec-error-bar-pg.gif
Is it possible that NASA and NOAA needed some kind of validity to warrent additional funding from the US government?
I agree re: Texas… and when I look at the western states it looks to me like the divisions’ borders have more to do with population (coverage of weather datasets?) than geography.
Anthony, thanks so much for this website. Unlike Nicole (from the comments on other threads) I actually read stuff here and was EDUCATED. My dad has been an anti-AGW dude for a while, but I turned him on to WUWT – and now we have a great time dissing AGW.
I thought that this winter seemed more like what I remember here in Texas. Now I know… it is!
The first map is broken down into “Climate Divisions.” A national map, with details, is here:
http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/USclimate/map.html
These are “climate” divisions used in the historical analysis of climate, not weather forecasting. An article on them is here:
http://www.climas.arizona.edu/forecasts/articles/climatedivisions_July07.pdf
These differ from the climate divisions used in forecasting, from what I see here:
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/predictions/long_range/poe_index.php?lead=1&var=t
REPLY: Thanks Basil, I’m writing from home today, sick with a major ear infection, and I just didn’t have the energy to search for it. I’ll correct it. Often the climate zones and forecast zones are very similar.- Anthony
It’s not unusual for the Northern VA, Maryland, Delaware area to hit the teens or single digits in January, so all they need is some precip… Of course, true to UHI, downtown DC is always 5-10 degrees warmer than the suburbs.
Because AGW is a global phenomenon, it would be more interesting to see similar graphs/maps for the whole planet. For example, check out
[snip]
REPLY: The main point of that article is to denigrate, so until Tamino cleans up his act, such as learning some manners, or maybe discussing Ian Joliffe in more detail, I will not be linking to it. You are welcome to cite another reference to global maps that does not include such denigrating language. – Anthony
No, they just want to get the legislation in place before more cooling comes, so they can get their taxes going. It’s always incredibly hard to repeal such things than it is to establish them.
The groupings are climate divisions used for many years by NWS and NCDC. They are supposed to represent terrain/macro climates. These were done well before urbanization and heat island came about.
Pass a climate change bill to do what? Blow off a couple dozen Pinatubos and El Chicon’s with nukes to cool the Earth? Use a thousand airtankers to seed the skies with sunlight reflecting something?
The word “normal” has no meaning here. So it’s more accurate to say it’s near the arbitrary mean.
I assume that the divergence from normal as shown on the maps is based on a 30-year average, while the graph shows each year’s temperature in relation to the 20th century mean.
Rob (09:49:21) :
What is it that we are supposed to see on that page you posted other than a ignorant man insulting people whose point of view he isn’t able to grasp?
Anthony, since the major thrust of the press release seems to be how 2008 “stacks up” against the period 1895 to the present, perhaps NOAA/NCDC felt it was inappropriate to include the Jan-Dec 2008 departure from normal map because it is a comparison to just 1971-2000?
It is really instructive to go back to “in the beginning” and see what was predicted by the UN IPCC and what has been the reality.
Hansen’s ideology makes him ‘no longer qualified to be the keeper of the global temperature data’
http://www.icecap.us/
Icecap Note: I assure you Craig represents a large percentage of real meteorologosts and climatologists within or no longer members of the AMS. Hansen has become a charicature of himself and has done more harm to the science and through that the world’s people than any other single individual allegedly in the field with the possible exception of Michael Mann. Actually there are others, whose names could fill this page who deserve dishonorable mention but that is a story for another day. Look for a story coming today addressing Gavin Schmidt’s (Hansen’s GISS pitbull) on Real Climate (should be renamed Reinventing Climate) disappointment that the Tuesday Lou Dobbs show dared to feature skeptics and specifically on his criticisms of my comments on global temperature assessments which I will show why I stand fully by.
The map for the year doesn’t look “normal” to me, at all and doesn’t seem to comport with 0.2 C above average. It looks quite green (cool) overall; whereas, “normal” would have a lot more white. ??