The NOAA/NCDC 2008 temperature map shows near normal USA in 2008

conus-jan-dec-2008

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:

conus-stateranks-2008

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:

conus-2008-timeseries

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.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Climate data, Weather. Bookmark the permalink.

138 Responses to The NOAA/NCDC 2008 temperature map shows near normal USA in 2008

  1. Jon says:

    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.

  2. MC says:

    Looks like the hockey stick went limp.

  3. Tarnsman says:

    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. ^_^

  4. kim says:

    Near, but below, normal. Waddya bet Long Island is one giant Urban Heat Island. Downwind as it is from the West.
    ======================================

  5. Chris Schoneveld says:

    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

  6. DaveE says:

    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.

  7. 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/

  8. DaveE says:

    See! I’m getting the hang of this AGW stuff. :-P

    DaveE.

  9. crosspatch says:

    From the Associated Press:

    WASHINGTON – The chairman of a key House committee says he wants to pass a climate change bill before Memorial Day.

    California Rep. Henry Waxman said Thursday the environment and U.S. economy depend on congressional action to confront the threat of climate change.

    What imbeciles. They actually believe they can regulate climate through legislation. Term limits, PLEASE!

  10. 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.

  11. Joel says:

    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?

  12. Julie L says:

    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!

  13. Basil says:

    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

  14. Jeff Alberts says:

    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. ^_^

    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.

  15. Rob says:

    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

  16. Jeff Alberts says:

    crosspatch (09:27:32) :

    From the Associated Press:

    “WASHINGTON – The chairman of a key House committee says he wants to pass a climate change bill before Memorial Day.

    California Rep. Henry Waxman said Thursday the environment and U.S. economy depend on congressional action to confront the threat of climate change. ”

    What imbeciles. They actually believe they can regulate climate through legislation. Term limits, PLEASE!

    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.

  17. rreindeer says:

    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.

  18. Robert Bateman says:

    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?

  19. Jeff Alberts says:

    The word “normal” has no meaning here. So it’s more accurate to say it’s near the arbitrary mean.

  20. Leon Brozyna says:

    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.

  21. 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?

  22. Joseph says:

    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?

  23. tarpon says:

    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.

  24. Ed Scott says:

    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.

  25. jae says:

    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. ??

  26. Basil says:

    Hope you get well soon, Anthony. My wife’s suffering through a tooth ache, trying to get the infection down prior to a root canal. Tooth aches; ear aches. Usually nothing “seriously” wrong, but boy do they hurt!

    I’ve become very familiar with these sources in my work on utility rate case “weather normalization.”

  27. Phil B. says:

    Anthony, thanks for doing such a wonderful job with your website in keeping the public aware of what the real science is saying regarding climate change and climate data. Could you do me a favor and review the West Point Military Academy and Central Park Temperature plot at the following web link:

    http://www.john-daly.com/stations/WestPoint-NY.gif

    I would like to know your comments on the linked temperature plot – seems to me it is very supportive of urban heat island concept.

    To me this plot is very important because it shows side by side over a period of about 180 years the temperature data for West Point, NY (located about 30 miles north of NYC) and Central Park right in the middle of New York City . You will see that there is basically no temperature rise at West Point over the entire 180 year period and West Point has remained a relatively rural area up to today. On the other hand, the Central Park data follows West Point until about 1880 and then it suddenly deviates and begins rising for the rest of the record up to the present. What the history of NYC tells me is that 1880 is just about the time that “urbanization” of Manhattan Island reached what is today now Central Park (recall that Manhattan grew northwards starting at the southern end of the island in the 1600s and filling out to the north end of the island by the early 20th century). Prior to 1880 the Central Park area was composed of woods and farm fields. Clearly urbanization arrived near Central Park right about the time the temperature started rising on the plot.

    I’m asking your opinion on this and thought this might make a good topic for you to discuss in detail on your website. Isn’t this just a fantastic example of urban heat island effect and doesn’t it show just how much we really need to learn about how heat islands are corrupting the temperature data?

  28. MarkW says:

    This seems odd, the part of Arizona that was red (above normal) in the previous map, is blue (below normal) here.

  29. Ed Scott says:

    Stanford professor solves the alternative energy problem.
    ———————————————————————————————-
    Professor Mark Jacobson discusses alternative energy sources
    http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2009/january7/videos/407_flash.html

    The US could replace all its cars and trucks with electric cars powered by wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres – in theory, at least. That’s the conclusion of a detailed study ranking 11 types of non-fossil fuels according to their total ecological footprint and their benefit to human health.

    REPLY: “wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres”? Doubtful…we have that much area of wind turbines in California alone already.- Anthony

  30. wattsupwiththat says:

    Phil B. Thanks for the kind words. It is not a good day for me today to do detailed analysis as I’m home sick, but I can tell you that the West Point temperature sensor is near a significant heat sink. A rock walled building

    see: http://gallery.surfacestations.org/main.php?g2_itemId=3160

  31. John Galt says:

    The key to understanding AGW is to understand that everything supports the theory. Everything is consistent with the models and if the data doesn’t match, just adjust the data accordingly.

  32. Bill Marsh says:

    Hmm. What’s the deal with Georgia? (The State, not the country)

    Top map shows it below normal to much below normal (and some record colder) while the bottom one says it was the 107th warmest on record. Somehow the two don’t jive for me.

  33. Bill Marsh says:

    Oh, never mind. The bottom is Dec, top Jan-Dec. (I need to read better).

  34. Dell Hunt, Jackson, Michigan says:

    Comparing this to the recently released GISS stats for 2008 at:

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/

    and close up of the graphic

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/Fig1.pdf

    First of all, when comparing the US 2008 map here, to the US portion of the GISS 2008 map, why does GISS show that the US was predominately slightly above average light yellow, with a very small portion in upper great plains slightly below average, and the NOAA data showing the US is predominatly below average, with just a slight amount of above average in Southern Pacific coast, gulf coast, and mid Atlantic coast.

    I realize that the two sets use a different base period, but does that explain for the full amount of the obvious discrepancy?

  35. Basil says:

    Leon Brozyna (10:00:07) :

    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.

    I believe the 30 year average is the current 1971-2000 period used by NOAA for climate normals. E.g., whenever you see “above normal” or “below normal,” et al., on a NOAA map, presume “normal” are the NOAA “normals” for 1971-2000.

    You can play around with this yourself, choosing different base periods, here:

    http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/USclimate/USclimdivs.html

    For instance, using 1971-2000 for a base period, I get:

    http://i41.tinypic.com/352onsx.jpg

    Using 1998-2007 as the base, I get:

    http://i39.tinypic.com/2508igg.jpg

    There is only a limited set of base periods, but they are pretty representative of the periods most people use, or would be interested in. A nice thing about this interactive page is the ability to set the dates in such a way as to get seasons. So, for instance, last winter, versus the 1971-2000 base period:

    http://i39.tinypic.com/29prllk.jpg

    This is the tool Joe D’Aleo used to create an “analog forecast” for this winter:

    http://icecap.us/images/uploads/DECMARUS.jpg

    Fun tool!

    Now, if I’ve had enough coffee to think straight, if 2008 was “below” or “much below” the 1971-2000 “normal” (for much of the US midsection) then it was even more below temps since 2000, since it was presumably warming 2001-2008 than 1971-2000.

  36. james griffin says:

    Did someone say it shows a warmer Europe……..look here mate we have’nt had a bloody BBQ in about three years.

    Warm it aint!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    We have deniers desease over here… Not deniers of AGW b ut deniers of a proper debate,
    Even the BBC’s top political journo Jeremy Paxman has said that.

    However today has been very funny as HM Gov ernmebt has declared that Heathrow will get a third runway.
    Let me make it perfectly clear that I feel very sorry for the people living under the flightpath but the reaction from the greens has beeb typically hilarious.
    Cue Emma Thompson the actress (Oscar nominee or winner at some stage) losing hre rag about emissions and the hypocritial government blah blah blah.
    My mid wandered….I started imagining how many time she had flown in the last 12 monyths through work and pleasure…holiday home southern europ>???
    Perhaps.
    And now the acid test…Emma, you have been nomiated for a Golden Globe, and you have been nominated for an Oscar…..
    I will Be right there darling.
    (Agent rings)..”booked thye flkights Emma”..thanks darling.

    Wins…yippee…..I would like to thank everyone and everyone…and British Airways for bringing me here.
    On the flight back home she reads a copy of the Gaurdian…an article on AGW and makes a vow to campaign for less emissions.

  37. james griffin says:

    PS sorry for all the spelling mistakes…pressed the wrong button…but you know what I meant.

  38. RICH says:

    GISS is prophecizing global temperature records in 2 years. This is quite a bold statement. Consider that we had a cool 2008 and that SC 24 will most likely have fewer sun spots than SC 23.

    But then again, the entire north polar ice cap being gone in 5 years is even more bold (if not delusional) a statement.

    Dr. James Hansen of GISS, also stated that there was “a good chance” for a “super El Nino” during the winter of 2007. A super El Nino did not happen.

    Anyway, the sciene against carbon is science achieved through carbon. So in all fairness and in order to slow the progression of science, we are going to impose a world wide carbon tax. Please add this upcoming tax to your short list.

    Accounts Receivable Tax
    Building Permit Tax
    CDL license Tax
    Cellular Phone Tax
    Cigarette Tax
    Corporate Income Tax
    Dog License Tax
    Excise Taxes
    Federal Income Tax
    Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
    Fishing License Tax
    Food License Tax
    Fuel Permit Tax
    Gasoline At x (44.75 cents per gallon)
    Gross Receipts Tax
    Hunting License Tax
    Inheritance Tax
    Inventory Tax
    IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
    Liquor Tax
    Luxury Taxes
    Marriage License Tax
    Medicare Tax
    Personal Property Tax
    Property Tax
    Real Estate Tax
    Service Charge Tax
    Social Security Tax
    Road Usage Tax
    Sales Tax
    Recreational Vehicle Tax
    School Tax
    State Income Tax
    State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
    Telephone Federal Excise Tax
    Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
    Telephone Federal,
    State and Local Surcharge Taxes
    Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
    Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax
    Telephone State and Local Tax
    Telephone Usage Charge Tax
    Utility Taxes
    Vehicle License Registration Tax
    Vehicle Sales Tax
    Watercraft Registration Tax
    Well Permit Tax
    Workers Compensation Tax

    Some bloggers here claim that capitalism has destroyed our country. I respectfully disagree. We are becoming a socialist nation…

    “One society under dogs, indivisible, with promiscuity and welfare for all.”

    -RICH

  39. Mike86 says:

    Now of a little OT weather comment. It’s stinking cold in Iowa. Unofficial temp at 1:20 PM (my car isn’t NIST tracable) was -9F. Windchills predicted to be something like -40F or lower. They’re talking the wind changing and snow blowing for tonight, so I’m really looking forward to blowing the driveway in the early AM. Local paper has story about recording coldest temperatures in 15 yeaers. Just weather, but it’s still cold.

    We’ve got a few square miles of wind turbines just to the East of here. They aren’t powering this low population, very rural state, so I don’t see them running a ton of electric cars etc.

  40. Rob S says:

    I am probably being dense …. but … each state has a number next to it that seems to indicate a range of coldest “1″ to Warmest “114″. What does that related to ?.

    REPLY: Years in the record, which is back to 1895. 2009-1895=114

    So one with a 7 such as Minnesota, is the 7th coldest on record.

    “South Carolina and Georgia had their sixth and eighth, respectively, warmest December on record.”

    Which is why they are 106 and 109 respectively.

    -Anthony

  41. Paddy says:

    The National Continuous Temperature graph shows that 1998 and 2004 or 05 were warmer than 1934. As I recall Steve McIntyre forced GISS to correct their data to reflect that 1934 was the hottest year in the history of the US. Your comment please.

  42. hghgold.net/ says:

    Now the global temperature is changing….

  43. Retired Engineer says:

    Obviously anecdotal, but a friend in Annapolis (east of DC) tells me it is colder than {snip} (saving the moderator the trouble). Of course, that’s just weather. Little chance of snow on Tuesday, but we can dream.

    Not sure I agree with ‘near normal’ as the map shows a lot more blue than red.

  44. Mike M says:

    How to spin a 21st century cooling trend into more proof of global warming in one easy step (and I’ve seen this in recent reports).

    2008 is slightly higher than the 20th century average? Well in that case say is that 2008 is one of the warmest years on record.

  45. Rich: “Some bloggers here claim that capitalism has destroyed our country. I respectfully disagree. We are becoming a socialist nation…”
    “You are right: GISS and all the other are bureaucratic entities owned by the goverment. We have already lived that in south america.
    A good example of the contrary were the “X” prize winners that managed to send a ship to the space with just 20 million dollars.

  46. MarkW says:

    REPLY: “wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres”? Doubtful…we have that much area of wind turbines in California alone already.- Anthony

    —————

    He is probably talking about the footprint of the tower, not the area needed between the towers.

  47. MarkW says:

    Some bloggers here claim that capitalism has destroyed our country. I respectfully disagree. We are becoming a socialist nation…

    ————–

    To some people, anything short of pure communism is some form of capitalism.

    While the US is not as regulated as Europe, we haven’t had capitalism here for well over a century.

  48. crosspatch says:

    Seems Europe is reconsidering nuclear power in the wake of the latest gas problems.

  49. Roger Sowell says:

    Robert Bateman (09:53:48) :

    “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?”

    U.S. Senators Warner and Lieberman tried to get a climate change bill passed last session, it failed. Senator Boxer now is working with them to draft a bill that Obama would sign.

    Obama is on record (made a video statement) that he wants a federal climate change law virtually identical to what California passed in 2006. The requirement is to reduce GHG by 2020 to the level emitted in 1990 — that is approximately 30 percent below business-as-usual. Further, reduce GHG by 2050 to 80 percent below the level emitted in 1990. That is approximately 87 percent below the business-as-usual case.

    These are draconian measures. For some perspective, the Kyoto signers were required to reduce GHG to just a few percent below 1990 levels (depends on the country, not consistent for all) by the period 2008 – 2012. It has not happened. Costs were too high to comply.

    These GHG, save-the-planet laws require such things as renewable fuels, renewable energy production (no GHG allowed), massive energy conservation projects such as replacing electric motors with very high-efficiency motors, cap-and-trade on carbon emissions, high-density housing, and a bunch of others. Basically, changing the way everyone lives.

    For more information on the California law, see

    http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm

    Roger E. Sowell
    Marina del Rey, California

  50. An Inquirer says:

    An interesting anecdote from the thermometer on my car: When my car was parked next to my garage (25 feet from my heated house), the thermometer read 3 degrees above zero. 150 feet from the house, the reading was 0. When I got on the highway, the temperature was 9 below.
    I recall that MMTS thermometers are located closer to buildings than previous thermometers, and now I wonder how much influence there is from heat escaping from a building.

  51. Jon says:

    Tarnsman, the simplistic beauty of ‘Climate Change’ is that no matter what happens you can blame America for having Air Conditioning, Cell Phones, SUV’s, whatever else you want to blame. Logic need not be a factor.

  52. David Porter says:

    james griffin (11:16:40) :

    You may have had a problem with the spelling but your view is as clear as daylight. Next time she’s interviewed on TV we will need to bow to her higher intellect.

  53. Roger Sowell says:

    For what it is worth, NOAA publishes weekly and monthly data on heating-degree days and cooling-degree days for U.S. cities, at

    http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/cdus/degree_days/

    I have been downloading the weekly data for Heating Degree Days Cities Listing for a few months now, into a spreadsheet and doing some calculations and graphs.

    What is interesting to me is that in the U.S. 2008 was definitely colder than 2007, by about 9 percent; that is, there were 9 percent more HD days in 2008 than 2007. Also, 2008 was only 1.2 percent warmer than the “average”, whatever that is. There were 1.2 percent fewer HD days in 2008 compared to the “average.”

    I have not yet downloaded the cooling degree data, but will soon.

    Roger E. Sowell
    Marina del Rey, California

  54. Fernando says:

    Basil: My glasses is not enough

    blue or red?

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/10/what-is-the-red-dot/

    thanks

  55. Ric Werme says:

    Mike86 (11:43:31) :

    Now a little OT weather comment. It’s stinking cold in Iowa. Unofficial temp at 1:20 PM (my car isn’t NIST tracable) was -9F. Windchills predicted to be something like -40F or lower.

    So drive slower. :-) Or at least drive downwind.

  56. DJ says:

    Last year was another hot one for Australia – http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/climate/change/20090105.shtml

    Given that the surface temperature of this planet was a long way above average in 2008, I can show you far more warm places that cool place.

  57. David Porter says:

    Sorry James but I should have added, according to my wife, that Emma, like all thespians, is a great scientist first and actor second, hence the mess we are in. They know it all.

  58. gary gulrud says:

    “So one with a 7 such as Minnesota, is the 7th coldest on record. ”

    I’m on the border between much below and just below norm for 2008. We will have 3 evenings this week -24F or below, with one such last month.

    Put me down for ‘much below’ in 2009. Not happy.

  59. Ed Scott says:

    REPLY: “wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres”? Doubtful…we have that much area of wind turbines in California alone already.- Anthony

    Altamont fulfills the space requirement.plus. The professor did say, “in theory. I would be interested in the details of how the 3 square kilometers would accommodate the required number of wind turbines.

    The world’s tallest building, the Burj Dubai, is 680 meters (2270.4 feet) in height and growing. The professor, who apparently lives in the seclusion of academic life, perhaps envisions a similar 2200-foot tower with 3 megawatt turbines located at 200-foot intervals. At 33 megawatts per tower, how many towers would be required to fulfill the energy requirement and would they fit within 3 square kilometers?

    Maintenance would pose a problem, but one of those prevalent mid-western tornadoes would bring the turbines down to ground level for ease of access.

  60. Novoburgo says:

    Not one commenter has made reference to the U.S. Temp graph and the fact that the warmest year on record is now back to 1998 and the hottest years of the 1930′s have disappeared. Tell a lie enough times and pretty soon it becomes irrefutable fact accepted by all and the rule of the land. The graph is a fabrication!

  61. Novoburgo says:

    This is why the battle is being lost. This is why Henry Waxman will have carte blanche with global warming legislation.

  62. Ed Scott says:

    crosspatch
    “What imbeciles. They actually believe they can regulate climate through legislation. Term limits, PLEASE!”

    The actions of politicians is more about regulating and controlling We the People than anything else. To achieve that goal they will use any spurious reason available.

    Term limits? Not likely. There is already talk of repealing the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution and the Chosen One, The Messiah, has yet to be inaugurated.

  63. Ed Scott says:

    John Galt (10:35:34) :

    “The key to understanding AGW is to understand that everything supports the theory. Everything is consistent with the models and if the data doesn’t match, just adjust the data accordingly.”

    John, are you applying for a position on the IPCC computer modeling team?

  64. David Corcoran says:

    108 years, with a total +.2 C rise. Hard to get shookup about that.

    There’s no way that the GISS Siberian temperatures can keep rising credibly unless Siberia is actually turning into a tropical paradise. Not likely.

    Given that, I expect even GISS’s reporting must start plummeting. Sorry warmists, continued rises should have been a safe bet, since temps have risen fairly steadily since the last ice age.

    The warmists are now pushing for policy changes with the ferocity of someone who’s got a year to live. They’ve got to know that if the cooling continues, the public will eventually reject all of warmism. But if the warmists can get their policies into law… the laws may outlast their scare campaign by many years. These folks will clean up on carbon trading, carbon credits, and position promotions, make no mistake.

  65. Lewis says:

    This reminds me of Byrons’ dedication to his Don Juan:
    You, Bob, are rather insolent, you know,
    At being disappointed in your wish
    To supersede all warblers here below,
    And then you overstrain yourself,or so,
    And tumble downwards like the flying fish
    Gasping on deck, because you soar too high, Bob,
    And fall for lack of moisture quite a dry Bob.

    N.B. ‘Bob’ was Robert Southey, the ‘poet laureate of the time and, representative of that consensus, and ‘a dry bob’ is slang for you know what..
    And if people were still capable of such savage satire..

  66. Sunfighter says:

    My parents live in Fort Wayne, In. The one “near normal” zone in Indiana, and i can assure you, its been definally a below normal year for them as well. And how does a much below zone meet up with a near normal zone anyways? There are a few of those on the map, I find that strange.

  67. George E. Smith says:

    “” Basil (11:06:43) :

    Leon Brozyna (10:00:07) :

    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. “”

    So Basil, who needs base periods; and for what purpose.

    Imagine if you will if someone threw a party; anf they invited every Climatologist and every member of the AGS to the party; and everybody brought their thermometers to the party so they could compare them all.

    Then somebody who was still sober could stand up and say; “Why don’t we arbitrarily define the triple Point of Water as being at 273.16 Kelvins, and also define zero degrees Celsius as being 273.15 Kelvins.

    Then everybody could reset their thermometers, go back home, and nobody ever again would ever have to mention a “base period”, or even an “anomaly”.

    Everybody could simply label their graphs in Deg C or in Kelvins for the snooty types.

    How would that work if the field of climatology decided to rejoin the rest of the science community, and make use of the already agreed upon international set of measurement units.

    George

  68. Ken G says:

    When I look at the Jan – Dec graph and then I look at this graph http://www.stats.indiana.edu/maptools/maps/thematic/population/us_daytime_density_00.jpg I can’t help but notice the apparent correlation of ‘above normal’ areas with high population density areas across the country, except for the midwest.

  69. Flanagan says:

    The fact that a nearly normal US temperature is seen as big news depicts clearly enough the warming trend we had.

    A big fat la nina, a solar minimum, a negative PDO and some volcano dust in the air, and all we have is a normal temperature? I wish there won’t be an el nino during the next solar maximum…

  70. Richard Sharpe says:

    George E Smith says:

    Then everybody could reset their thermometers, go back home, and nobody ever again would ever have to mention a “base period”, or even an “anomaly”.

    Everybody could simply label their graphs in Deg C or in Kelvins for the snooty types.

    The problem with this is that color-coded anomalies are very good for scaring people, especially when displayed on a standard global projection.

    All that red running across the top, even if it is only showing that they are 4 degrees above the base of -30 degrees scares people greatly.

  71. Mike M says:

    I think the real reason there’s such a foaming-at-the-mouth push to enact legistion now is that the writing is on the wall for an extended cold period over the next few decades. Little by little, the facts about the AGW scam are leaking out and the mainstream media can’t keep the truth bottle up forever. This is the left’s last chance to curtail personal freedom before the public wises up (as is starting to happen in Europe).

    What a gift it was to the socialists- That CO2 (the byproduct of capitalism and economic progress) could be potentially harming the earth. Now that the truth about it is coming out, they’re scared to death of potentially squandering that gift, so it’s now a race to use it before its too late.

  72. Basil says:

    Dell Hunt, Jackson, Michigan (11:04:27) :

    Comparing this to the recently released GISS stats for 2008 at:

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/

    I realize that the two sets use a different base period, but does that explain for the full amount of the obvious discrepancy?

    The different base period has a lot to do with it. Maybe the degree of smoothing, too. Here is the GISS data, with 250km smoothing, and with a base of 1971-2000:

    http://i44.tinypic.com/fk5u37.jpg

    It’s closer to what we’re looking at here, with cooling in the upper midwest, warming in CA and the southwest, and northeast. The biggest “discrepancy” I see is not enough cooling in the northwest. But maybe that’s the screwy smoothing that GISS does with these maps.

  73. RenaudC says:

    I have not read all the comments but I love that they mentionned that “South Carolina and Georgia had their sixth and eighth, respectively, warmest December on record.”, without mentionning that one state had their 7th coldest December, another one their 8th Coldest then it is 11th (2 states), 12th, 13th (2 states) coldest December, so 7 states had their 13th or worst coldest December over the last 115 years!

    On the warm side, the 3rd is the 13th warmest then there is one 14th warmest in 4th and in 5th a 19th warmest.

    So technically there are not wrong although when you look at the 5 states who had their warmest December and the 5 who had their coldest December, clearly the situation is on the coldest being worst.

    It is with this sort of presentation that without lying they give you a wrong picture. everybody will be saying “can you believe South Carolina and Georgia had their sixth and eighth, respectively, warmest December on record” My god, the end is near!!!!!

  74. J. Peden says:

    Anyway, the sciene against carbon is science achieved through carbon.

    That’s what I’m talking about, bro! Apparently, if the Alarmists didn’t have the ability to think, then they wouldn’t have to worry so much.

  75. Leon Brozyna says:

    O/T

    In case no one’s checked it out yet, it is now official – WUWT is the 2008 Best Science Blog.

    I know, it’s a bit anticlimactic.

  76. John F. Pittman says:

    Listen carefully, Jacobson is talking about the footprint of the supports for wind turbines replacing CO2 producing cars only, with electric cars supplied by a grid. It is not stated how big the vanes, or height of structures, nor our tendency of increased energy use for personel transportation. The problems with intermittant wind are said to be solvable with optimization tools, but were not specifired. The specification is about the power generated, not distribution. Nor, the problems with transmission loss or the impact to the grid due to intermittant sources are not specified. HIs talk does not agree with the practical problems that have been expeirenced in Texas, Calfornia, and E.U., already documented in various media. It sounds like a think tank paper where without the assumptions, and caveats, the information is, as has been stated eloquently before, actually “disinformation”.

  77. John F. Pittman says:

    Antedoctal, but here in South Carolina, we are expected to have cold we have not seen since the early 1970′s. Scrambling to make sure we don’t freeze important utilities. Predicted to be about 9F, most systems are put in with the assumption of greater than 20F sustained temperatures for x hours, and y windspeed. Windchill factor, time weighted can be quite local phenomena. Hope we don’t lose essential services. Category 6 natural gas users are being curtailed in SC.

  78. Mike Bryant says:

    Normal body temperature is 97F to 100F
    http://hypertextbook.com/facts/LenaWong.shtml
    Normal room temperature is 68F to 77F
    http://www.answers.com/topic/room-temperature

    However according to the map from NCDC at the top of the page there is no normal temperature of these United States. We have record hot or record cold, much above normal or much below normal, above normal or below normal, or finally “near” normal.

    No matter what happens, temperatures will never be normal again.

  79. gary gulrud says:

    “some volcano dust in the air, and all we have is a normal temperature? I wish there won’t be an el nino during the next solar maximum…”

    Hold the volcano dust for now, nothing noteworthy happening yet within 70 degrees of the equator.

    What sort of Rmax do you need for crisping your wallabies?

  80. KipHansen says:

    Anthony,

    What do you think the deal is with Long Island being “Much Above Normal”. It looks like one of those weird anomalies. How much is “Much” anyway?

    Kip

  81. bill says:

    On another website, catholicfundamentalism.com it was suggested that since so many surface stations were poorly sited, that there may be volunteers who’d picture their own thermometers, and set up a central data base that would record actual temperatures.
    That way, we would have a good, solid check on what the gov’t weather stations were telling us.
    I couldn’t tell if this was a good idea, but it seemed to be.

  82. Basil says:

    George E. Smith (14:06:02) :

    So Basil, who needs base periods; and for what purpose.

    Base periods are useful for purposes of comparisons. I think it is fair to ask, though, why there are so many variations. There’s a kind of convention for using 1971-2000 as the current climatological normal, so why cannot GISS get with the program and use that, instead of being two decades behind with 1951-1980?

  83. Harold K McCard says:

    Perhaps I am misinterpreting the graph where Anthony states:

    Here is what the CONUS temperature time series looks like with 2008 added, as included in the press release:

    I interpret the slope of the line labeled Long-Term Mean to indicate the mean temperature in the lower-48 has increased about 0.2 deg F since 1895.

    What am I missing?

  84. RICH says:

    Interesting points here. I like it. Reality is all but behind the veil.

    And in cased you missed it…

    The science ‘against’ carbon, is science that was ‘achieved’ through carbon.

  85. JimB says:

    OT, but “fish poop” is now known to offset global warming…

    “The ocean’s delicate acid balance may be getting help from an unexpected source, fish poop. The increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere not only drives global warming, but also raises the amount of CO2 dissolved in ocean water, tending to make it more acid, potentially a threat to sea life.”

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_sc/sci_fish_poop

    Can we now expect to see a market for poop-credits?

    JimB

  86. John M. Towers says:

    Great website! I have bean reading this now for about 6 months. mainly watching the diatribes about global warming from all of you folks who are much smarter than I. I have a question though. Can someone plase tell me what the optimum temperature is! If no one knows then what is the problem anayway?

  87. Pamela Gray says:

    This fascination with the weather average across the US is interesting (given the fact that there are several climate zones in this great country of ours that have been and still are stable since way before 1895). It is almost beginning to sound like the cackles of a woman trying to diet. I weighed myself today on one of those counterbalanced tall scales at school. 123.75 lbs. I went straight home afterwards (IE got home 10 minutes later) and stepped on my bathroom scales. 123.2 lbs. Lost 0.55 lbs! Now that is something to celebrate! I am winning! The scales are going down!

    Silly isn’t it. Up or down, we are talking just a bit heavier here, and a bit lighter there. Close enough. Looks average to me. No change. And not much information that helps me make decisions about whether or not my diet has been successful.

    Using a US average, or an Australian average, or a Siberian average graph isn’t very useful either. I sure as hell am not going to worry about .2 degrees change in US temperature since 1895, up OR down. That could well be within the margin of error. Just like my scales and the one at the school. Plus my spring wheat could not give a rats ass over an average temperature change so small.

    What does matter is how weather may change (and drastically) within for example, a temperate climate zone from warmer to colder (mind you, it will still be a temperate climate, just colder weather wise), thus potentially destroy crops not meant for a change from lows of below freezing to lows of below 0.

    The data that is useful, and vital, to people, animals, and agriculture, is the messy data. The actual high’s and low’s on a daily basis. You know. The noisy graph all the “climate” folks want to get rid of so the line will move the way they want it to move. If you grow wine grapes, the daily noisy data is the only data that provides the numbers you need to calculate Sun days. If you grow spring wheat, the number of days and dates below zero are vital. Without this daily actual temperature information, you all don’t eat, drink, and be merry.

    I wish NOAA would get back to being what it once was. A source for agriculture to manage growing seasons and maybe make payments on the bank loan. This overindulging global climate change fanatics is as useful to me as a stuffed shirt dandy knocking on my door wanting a date.

    Okay. Rant off.

  88. JimB says:

    John,
    One of the posters here, George M., made this point some time ago. I referred to it as the “next questions” which seem to stymie many of the folks who support the theory of AGW. “Even if you COULD impact the temperature of the planet, what temp should the thermometer be set to?…and WHO get’s to choose that temp?”

    JimB

  89. Ric Werme says:

    John M. Towers (17:20:38) :

    Can someone please tell me what the optimum temperature is! If no one knows then what is the problem anayway?

    I used to wonder about that myself, then I began to wonder who gets to decide what the optimum temperature should be. Answer that, and then you’ll have an idea what the optimum temperature will be.

  90. Pamela Gray says:

    The optimum temperature is whatever puts clothes on your back and food on the most tables for the lowest price.

  91. Basil says:

    Harold K McCard (16:11:50) :

    Perhaps I am misinterpreting the graph where Anthony states:

    I interpret the slope of the line labeled Long-Term Mean to indicate the mean temperature in the lower-48 has increased about 0.2 deg F since 1895.

    What am I missing?

    There is no slope to that line, not if it is labeled correctly. I know that it looks ever so much like it is a little further below the tick mark on the left side than the right, but either that is an optical illusion, or we have a poor drawing.

    It’s a flat line, or is supposed to be. That’s how it is labeled.

  92. Pamela Gray says:

    I think I know what he meant. He is saying that out of that noisy line, he has cherry picked December 2008 and says that we are .2 degrees warmer than the mean for the period. Without coming right out and saying it, he has pulled some new kind of statistic out of his hat and has told us that December 2008 is an indicator that we are warmer that we should be, therefore we have global warming, and the graph is a demonstration of that premise. Please provide formula for said new statistical method comparing December 2008 to an arbitrary mean as an indication of global warming.

    However, I could have jumped to a conclusion here and have read into and between the lines what Harold intended to say without saying it.

  93. Greg says:

    In that case, I delare the optimum temperature to be 21degC by night and 35degC by day. With a mild shower once a week and heavy rainfall once a month. Now can we all go back to sleep.
    PS: thanks Anthony for a great web site.

  94. Graeme Rodaughan says:

    Flanagan (14:12:01) :

    The fact that a nearly normal US temperature is seen as big news depicts clearly enough the warming trend we had.

    Warming trend we had – note the past tense.
    Also – for much of the US – “nearly normal” is well below “normal” temperatures.

    A big fat la nina, a solar minimum, a negative PDO and some volcano dust in the air, and all we have is a normal temperature? I wish there won’t be an el nino during the next solar maximum…

    La nina? Yes, “big fat la nina”? is that really the case, I thought it was rather moderate, certainly not on the scale of the 98 El Nino.

    Negative PDO only started around the beginning of 2007 and is expected to run for approx 30 years, – we are not more than 10% into the -ve PDO cycle, allow it some time to get going, and we will see what the real impact is.

    The key point is your implicit admission of all these factors – overwhelming the CO2 warming…. which begs the question of the strength of the CO2 forcing.

    Also NOAAs data has a question mark with regard to the impact of urbanisation, and may actually understate the amount of cold weather that has occurred.

  95. Rob says:

    James: (10:00:59)

    Tamino may be more acerbic than needed at times (OK, maybe more than a little), but in this instance, he’s right on. The 2008 globally-averaged temperature is still within the amplitude envelope of higher frequency climate change (e.g., ENSO variations) that is superimposed on the observed warming exactly predicted by Hansen and others starting in 1988 (e.g., see Rahmstorf et al., 2007, Science, v. 316, p. 709). It’s unfortunate that Anthony deleted the Tamino link, because the first plot of that link demonstrated perfectly the nature of the data scatter vs the AGW trend and the fact that the 2008 temp is within the scatter envelope. To trumpet the 2008 temp as meaning anything otherwise is misleading. Find the link yourself (it’s not too hard: It’s dated Dec. 31), ignore the over-the-top rhetoric and look at the first draft. It’s pretty revealing.

  96. Rob says:

    Oops. I mistakenly wrote “draft” not “plot” in the 2nd to last sentence.

  97. Mike Bryant says:

    I think the optimal temperature should be set according to Weather Service Forecast Office forecast zones. Or better yet house by house… Wait a minute, we already do that….

  98. E.M.Smith says:

    Basil (10:23:43) :
    Hope you get well soon, Anthony. My wife’s suffering through a tooth ache, trying to get the infection down prior to a root canal. Tooth aches; ear aches. Usually nothing “seriously” wrong, but boy do they hurt!

    FWIW: I prefer the commercial antibiotics, but I’ve also had decent success using dandelion. The name, taraxacum officinalis, roughly translates to treatment for what ails you. It seems to be generally supportive of function, including immune function. Add a few leaves a day to salads and you feel better (and I had some minor infection issues end). Anecdotal, yes… but there are a few thousand years of such anecdotes… And I always have a supply in my “lawn” even on weekends. Dandelion tea is easier to swallow if you have teeth problems.

    Cloves make a decent numbing agent for oral pains. I’ve used ground cloves on some spots. Oil of cloves is more effective, but a bit strong for my tastes and it isn’t usually in the spice cabinet at 2am … It doesn’t last as long as I would like, but sometimes it’s enough. It is likely to be antibiotic to some extent. Many of the aromatic oils are.

    When I was a kid, the standard treatment for earache was warm (NOT HOT! test on your arm first!) olive oil dripped into the ear. It is very easy to kill the eardrum if the oil is too hot, so this process is now discouraged, but if you are desperate and careful it can help. I don’t know if it pasteurizes the bugs or if olives have an antimicrobial in them. I do remember that at about 110 – 120 F if felt nice. There was relief for a while.

    (No, I’m not an alternative medicine nut. I’m a survivalist preparedness nut ;-) Doctor if available, alternative if not (or if they just are not making any progress.)

    May both of you be well soon!

  99. E.M.Smith says:

    Ed Scott (10:31:20)
    The US could replace all its cars and trucks with electric cars powered by wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres [...]

    REPLY: “wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres”? Doubtful…we have that much area of wind turbines in California alone already.- Anthony

    I think they mean 3 sq.km per car ;-)

  100. Raybo says:

    Ken G (14:06:37) :
    ” I can’t help but notice the apparent correlation of ‘above normal’ areas with high population density areas across the country, except for the midwest.”

    Brilliant! If we could take out urban sites suffering the “heat island effect”, maybe the 2008 NOAA map wouldn’t have any “above average” areas? Thanks for pointing this out!

  101. Roger Sowell says:

    Strange to see some factual things, aside from all the data manipulation or massaging…if the globe is warming.

    Has anyone looked lately at the Arctic ice extent — Anthony has a link at the top right. Then, notice how the slope of the 2009 line is higher than virtually any other line on the graph (the first derivative)? Does that indicate getting colder, not warmer?

    Has anyone noticed the sea level rise has stopped, according to the Boulder SSH data? And, that in many areas of the world, it is actually dropping? One such are of SSH decrease is off the U.S. west coast, where California enacted the draconian AB 32 to prevent sea level rise? Is the ocean evaporating, and dropping the water as snow somewhere?

    Has anyone noticed that heating degree days for 2008 were much greater than for 2007 in the U.S., approximately 9 percent more? And, cooling-degree days were approximately 11 percent fewer in 2008 compared to 2007?

    I suspect everyone has noticed that the CO2 is still rising from the Mauna Loa data.

    Does all this not make a persuasive case that the CO2 – link, or causation, is false? Perhaps even that GW is not happening, and AGW is therefore nonsensical?

    Admittedly, I am a bit new at all this, so if this is off-base, can someone guide me?

    Roger E. Sowell
    Marina del Rey, California

  102. E.M.Smith says:

    Ed Scott (10:31:20)
    The US could replace all its cars and trucks with electric cars powered by wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres [...]

    REPLY: “wind turbines taking up less than 3 square kilometres”? Doubtful…we have that much area of wind turbines in California alone already.- Anthony

    Listening carefully to the flash… he says ‘where they actually touch the ground’. That’s 3 square kilometers of POLE or MAST surface area where the windmills attach to the ground. A bit, um, misleading…

  103. E.M.Smith says:

    james griffin (11:14:38) :
    However today has been very funny as HM Gov ernmebt [...]
    reaction from the greens has beeb [...]
    My mid wandered….

    Hard time typing with mittens on? ;-) Wishing you a warmer future…

  104. Mike Bryant says:

    3 sq km per car=1.158 sq mi per car
    about 250,000,000 cars in USA
    250,000,000 cars x 1.158 sq mi = 289,500,000 sq mi needed for windmills
    Total sq mi in USA = 3,536,278 sq mi
    3,536,278 sq mi – 289,500,000 sq mi =… Hmmmm i may be missing something here…

  105. Mike Bryant says:

    “The 2008 globally-averaged temperature is still within the amplitude envelope of higher frequency climate change (e.g., ENSO variations) that is superimposed on the observed warming exactly predicted by Hansen and others starting in 1988 (e.g., see Rahmstorf et al., 2007, Science, v. 316, p. 709)”

    I believe this is in the encyclopedia under, “Grasping at straws.”

  106. Roger Carr says:

    james griffin (11:16:40) wrote: “PS sorry for all the spelling mistakes…pressed the wrong button…but you know what I meant.”
    Now you tell us, James, way after I finished chuckling at your wicked humour…

  107. E.M.Smith says:

    RICH (11:39:05) :
    Some bloggers here claim that capitalism has destroyed our country. I respectfully disagree. We are becoming a socialist nation…

    Technically… now that the government has purchased large stakes in many banks and automakers (yeah, they called it a loan, but with a priority security interest? That’s just a fancy buy…):

    Our form of government is now what is called Lange Type Socialism. The ‘small bits’ are left to markets, the ‘large bits’ are owned or managed by the government. So I’m sorry, but you are wrong. “Becoming” is the wrong tense. Make it ‘have become’. And if you want to impress the economists in the audience, make it “Lange type”

    From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

    Lange and Dickinson saw potential problems with bureaucratization in market socialism. According to Dickinson “the attempt to check irresponsibility will tie up managers of socialist enterprises with so much red tape and bureaucratic regulation that they will lose all initiative and independence” Dickinson 1938 p214). In the Economics of Control (1944) Abba Lerner admitted that capital investment would be politicized in market socialism.

    Seems to fit…

  108. Sakaki Onsei says:

    I just find it funny that Northeast Nebraska had record cold.

    Then again, nothing ever happens in NE Nebraska…so no worries.

    Al Gore, NE Nebraska and the Oregon Coast have a message for you: SHUT UP!

  109. Rob says:

    “I believe this is in the encyclopedia under, “Grasping at straws.””

    I agree, Mike. But this is your one, or possibly two years to get away with it, so I’ll let you have your fun. See you in a significantly warmer (by ~0.2C) next decade.

  110. Mike Bryant says:

    Man, that 0.2C in ten years is really going to feel good, Rob…
    Mike Bryant

  111. Karl Heuer says:

    The article goes on to say that there would be 73,000 to 144,000 5MW wind turbines needed to power an all-electric US fleet. The article also states .5% of the land area would be needed.

    http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2009/january7/power-010709.html

    1% land area is 35,000 sq. miles
    .5% is 17,500 sq miles

    now, if we used a factor of 4 turbines per sq km, that would give us between

    That gives us between 18,000 and 36,000 sq. km. – median of 27,000

    using 3 gives us between 21000 and 48,000 — median of ~34,000 sq. km

    5MW turbines are behemoths with a blade radius of 100+meters, to avoid turbulence and blocking issues, 3 or 4 is probably all you could reasonably fit on a square km,

    It seems likely that 30,000 square km is what the article meant to say

  112. Roger Carr says:

    Greg (19:31:15) wrote: “In that case, I delare the optimum temperature to be 21degC by night and 35degC by day.”
    An excellent example of why men go to war, Greg. Your optimums would kill me (we are having a taste of them in Melbourne). It may be my time of life, but 8-10C at night and 23C day is my dream; and Pamela Gray’s climate is feared…

  113. peer says:

    the CONUS temp map is not accurate and does not conform to the published scientific work of Hansen in “GISS analysis of surface temperature change
    J. Hansen, R. Ruedy, J. Glascoe, and M. Sato
    NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York”, Figure 6 as has been discussed before here

  114. Brent says:

    What I find most interesting about this word “normal” is this: How do we actually know what the “normal” climate is supposed to be? In other words, where is it written that the climate is supposed to be exactly the same every year to be considered “normal”?

    We are consistently told that the Arctic region is melting, and yet somehow it is -78 F in Alaska. Somehow an Arctic cold front all the way down in Illinois made yesterday’s high temperature -5 F.

    Does 1+1=3? If it is so warm up there, where is all the cold air coming from? I’m no scientist, but I am smart enough to question the obvious and see lies when I see them. Unfortunately, the masses who are edumacated solely by TV don’t understand (or even care).

  115. TJ says:

    That first map sure identifies areas of high population growth (red: Boston, NewYork-Phil-Washington megopolis, South Florida, Houston, So Cal) and decline (blue: upper and central midwest) I am sure it is strictly a coincidence though. There is no need to investigate. Maybe people are moving to the red areas because they like it warm? Naah!

  116. Steve M. says:

    RE: the Graph

    I thought it was “general consensus” that 1934 was the hottest year on record for the 48 states. Looks like NOAA has adjusted this downward to make 1998 and 2006 warmer.

  117. David S says:

    New record low temps from the weather channel 1/16/2009.

    http://www.weather.com/newscenter/topstories/todayinweather.html?from=hp_news

    Today in weather
    Tim Ballisty, Meteorologist and Renee Willet, Content Manager, weather.com
    Jan. 16, 2009 8:58 am ET
    Record lows in the 20s, 30s below zero | Inauguration forecast | On this date

    8:17 am ET
    Several record lows pouring in: TWC meteorologist Mark Ressler has gathered up more and more record lows this morning coming in from the Midwest and Northeast. Like we said in the 7:57 am ET update, there may be even more to come in during the morning.
    Maine
    • Caribou: -37 [-27 in 1984]
    • Houlton: -36 [-26 in 2004]
    • Bangor: -25 [-20 in 1994]
    New Hampshire
    • Concord: -24 [-19 in 1984]
    Vermont
    • Burlington: -21 [-20 in 1920]
    • Montpelier: -25 [-21 in 1994]
    Iowa
    • Waterloo: -34** [-26 in 1977]
    • Ottumwa :-20 [-19 in 1977]
    • Mason City: -31 [-25 in 1977]
    • Dubuque: -30 [-30 in 1888]
    • Cedar Rapids: -27 [-23 in 1982]
    • Spencer: -28 [-26 in 1977]
    Minnesota
    • St. Cloud: -34 [-31 in 1977]
    Illinois
    • Moline: -29 [-23 in 1888]
    • Rockford: -25 [-24 in 1982]
    • Peoria: -21 [-20 in 1977]
    Michigan
    • Detroit: -15 [-14 in 1972]
    **ties coldest temp on record 3/1/1962
    7:57 am ET
    Breaking subzero record lows: It’s becoming a broken record when talking about broken record lows. With the arctic air mass in place, cities are reaching down low for new records as temps tumble into the 20s and 30s below zero.
    Here’s a list of new record lows already set this morning. There will be more to come in this morning so check back to see the updates.
    City: New Record [Old Record]
    • Caribou, ME: -33 [-27 in 1984]
    • Houlton, ME: -33 [-26 in 2004]
    • Waterloo, IA: -34** [-26 in 1977]
    • St. Cloud, MN: -33 [-31 in 1977]
    • Montpelier, VT: -24 [-21 in 1994]
    **ties coldest temp on record 3/1/1962

  118. RICH says:

    E.M. Smith,

    I fear that you are correct, although I am reluctant in admitting what we ‘have become’.

    We are witnessing the crash and burn of the modern Roman Empire, with flames stoked by greed and corruption. Global socialism is right around the corner, with help from a uniting cause (environmentalism) linking us all.

    I had to get up at 2:00am to fire up and connect our generator because we lost power up here in New Hampshire. I have expensive equipment which contains water and would freeze, expand and cause extensive damage.

    Pulling a generator through over a foot of snow, with -10 degree temperatures, in pajamas… sucks. And I live closer to the equator than the north pole.

    Is it time to move south or should I hold out for “hope” that we just might get a little global warming?

  119. Bill P says:

    Indiana boy sticks tongue to metal lamppost.
    Double-Dog Dare Works Again
    (Warming Earth doesn’t help!)

    http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977564859&grpId=3659174697245380&nav=Groupspace

    Anthony, did you ever report on one of these stories?

    REPLY: Why would I? – Anthony

  120. gary gulrud says:

    We set another all time record, -33, eclipsing -31 in 1977 for last night. Maine seems to have set lowest temp ever in BearCreek? -50 is the claim.

    I know, it’s just weather.

  121. Roger Sowell says:

    Igloo construction class begins at noon.

    Bring a shovel. And warm work gloves.

    Hot coffee will be provided.

  122. Basil says:

    E.M.Smith (20:07:28) :

    Ditto here on being prepared and all that. Somebody makes a little “tooth ache kit” that includes oil of clove, along with some “stuff” to fill in for fillings that have fallen out. We used that, along with ambesol and OTC pain medicine until we could get to a dentist and get a commercial antibiotic. These things never happen at convenient times: we were on vacation 700 miles from home, it was December 30th, when all this started.

    For myself, I’ve managed to kill a few tooth infections with Dr. Tichenor’s straight. Not for the faint hearted. Dr. Tichenor’s is not easy to find, so I keep some extra stored in my “preparedness pantry.” Along with some 190 proof Everclear. The latter is not even allowed for sale in nanny states.

    Well, back to the sun.

  123. WilliMc says:

    The carbon tax list should include taxes on livestock, esp. cows. Another omission was beer, whisky and sodas.

    A question. Isn’t the temperature recorded on a thermometer a proxy for heat?

    I recall being stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas, in an area comprised of a meadow, where the temperature reache ninety odd degrees in the summer. Our unit was sent to Camp Irwin, Cal., which we were told was six miles from Death Valley, where the tempeCanratures were frequently over 110 degrees. We suffered from the heat at Riley but not at Irwin. No humidity there.

    In a cubic meter of atmosphere, it seems to me more heat is contained in a humid atmosphere than a dry one. Temperature measurement fails to account for that. Can someone tell me why this is wrong?

  124. WilliMc says:

    Sorry about the error in spelling ‘temperatures’ above.

  125. NOAA US has trended up relative to NASA US – I just did a post on this http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=4852

  126. AnonyMoose says:

    And now another branch of the U.S. Government, the USGS, announces they led a synthesis of trash studies. The latest consensus is that the Arctic is melting. Apparently someone thinks this is a popularity contest rather than a study of reality.
    http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2109
    http://climatescience.gov/

  127. Ric Werme says:

    WilliMc (10:03:32) :

    A question. Isn’t the temperature recorded on a thermometer a proxy for heat?

    I recall being stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas, in an area comprised of a meadow, where the temperature reache ninety odd degrees in the summer. Our unit was sent to Camp Irwin, Cal., which we were told was six miles from Death Valley, where the temperatures were frequently over 110 degrees. We suffered from the heat at Riley but not at Irwin. No humidity there.

    In a cubic meter of atmosphere, it seems to me more heat is contained in a humid atmosphere than a dry one. Temperature measurement fails to account for that. Can someone tell me why this is wrong?

    There are sort of two concepts here. Heat is both “sensible” (and that’s what a thermometer measures) and “latent” (due to water vapor which “contains” the heat needed to evaporate it. As air rises, it cools, and when water vapor turns to cloud it releases the latent heat, so the temperature declines slower than would happen if the air were dry.

    As for Camp Irwin, the dry air evaporated any sweat quickly and that cooled your skin. (Sensible heat converted to latent heat.) At Riley, you sweat would largely drip off – you body worked to produce it and got little benefit.

    My family bicycled across the hot, dry desert of eastern Oregon in July 2003. 106F wasn’t fun, even in the dry air. We generally soaked our jerseys in any stream that had water. Much less work than making sweat.

  128. Jeff Alberts says:

    I recall being stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas, in an area comprised of a meadow, where the temperature reache ninety odd degrees in the summer. Our unit was sent to Camp Irwin, Cal., which we were told was six miles from Death Valley, where the temperatures were frequently over 110 degrees. We suffered from the heat at Riley but not at Irwin. No humidity there.

    I was at Ft. Riley in the early 80s (1983/84) and we went to Ft Irwin (I assume you mean Fort and not Camp) in August 1983 for 30 days. It was hot, but, as the saying goes, it was a dry heat. Actually it wasn’t that dry. It rained more while we were there than it had for the previous 10 years combined. Lots of flash floods, and the mudskippers were happy.

  129. W^L+ says:

    As for Camp Irwin, the dry air evaporated any sweat quickly and that cooled your skin. (Sensible heat converted to latent heat.) At Riley, you sweat would largely drip off – you body worked to produce it and got little benefit.

    The other thing about Ft Irwin and nearby areas (Barstow and Victorville, CA) is that the low humidity means that it can cool more quickly in the evenings. A triple-digit temperature (F) day may be followed by an evening in the 70s or 80s F. And when I say evening, I mean a few minutes after sundown.

    Love the site, check it daily, but since I’m not at all versed in the field, I rarely comment.

  130. Jeff Alberts says:

    The other thing about Ft Irwin and nearby areas (Barstow and Victorville, CA) is that the low humidity means that it can cool more quickly in the evenings. A triple-digit temperature (F) day may be followed by an evening in the 70s or 80s F. And when I say evening, I mean a few minutes after sundown.

    Very true. While it was 110 in the daytime, at night it got close to freezing. Had to sleep in my mountain bag on the top of the APC.

  131. Harry Eagar says:

    It seems to me that the headline on the press release is ambiguous. The average 2008 temperatures may have ended up near the long-term norm, but that map is anything but normal.

    Every other large region temperature map I have ever seen, for any time scale, has some red and some blue. An all-blue map is anything but normal.

  132. E.M.Smith says:

    Roger Carr (21:58:21) :
    Greg (19:31:15) wrote: “In that case, I delare the optimum temperature to be 21degC by night and 35degC by day.”
    An excellent example of why men go to war, Greg. Your optimums would kill me (we are having a taste of them in Melbourne). It may be my time of life, but 8-10C at night and 23C day is my dream; and Pamela Gray’s climate is feared…

    I’m sorry, but this is just all wrong. I am quite certain that 35C +/- 2 day and night year round is ideal. What? Never been to Jamaica?

  133. Roger Knights says:

    The tan portions of the map are above normal.

  134. WilliMc says:

    Thanks for the input. As I understand the humidity is not a factor in measuring by a thermometer.

    By the way, it was Camp Irwin back in 1954.

    REPLY:
    Humidity does not affect the thermometer itself, but humidity does affect the local atmosphere, and thus the temperature highs and lows measured by the thermometer. Witness the desert for example, where low humidity encourages deeper overnight low temperatures. – Anthony

  135. grumpy says:

    Has anyone taken into account that most weather stations (here in Oz) anyway are sited at airports. Most airports I know have great swathes of concrete and bitumen which absorb a great deal of heat during the day and release it again at night.

    BTW I have also noticed while standing out on that tarmac that any storms (esp summer) in the area seem to split up just near the airport, go around and rejoin on the other side. This is in Wagga Wagga, NSW where summer day temps of 40+ degrees C are not uncommon. I have had it explained to me as the upwelling of heat from the airport and has been noticed by colleagues in other places like Katherine, NT which has similar temps but is much more tropical.

    I too am interested in what is considered a “normal” temperature for the planet when 40+ here in the southern hemisphere is offset somewhat by the -30+ experienced at similar northern latitudes. Who decided that 1990 or whatever is the “climate optimum” ?

  136. Corrinne Novak says:

    I have tracked the local (mid North Carolina) temperature since October 1st. October, November and January were all colder than “normal” by 1 to 4 degrees F. December was warmer only because of a week long warm spell. So far the entire winter still averages about 1 degree F colder than normal.

    I think the choice of the month of December instead of the yearly or quarterly data was another example of “picking the data to fit the wishes of the powers that be” Forty years as an industrial chemist has taught me the fastest way to get fired is to publish data that contradicts the wishes of the powers that be especially when it is the truth. Honesty got me fired five times over the years so I do not see any reason this fact of life has changed, especially when powerful men are going to use the data for political reasons.

  137. Jarhead68 says:

    All I know is that I read a piece where they tried to use actual historical data and go back in time to see if the computer models matched up to what actually happened and guess what…

    The computer models failed miserably to predict the “future”. DUH!!!

    To all the global warming alarmists out there: It’s the SUN, stupid!!!!

Comments are closed.