Another entry from the weather is not climate department, this time courtesy of Tom Skilling, WGN-TV meteorologist.
Chicago has its coolest July 8 in 118 years
- By Tom Skilling
- July 9, 2009
For the 12th time this meteorological summer (since June 1), daytime highs failed to reach 70 degrees Wednesday. Only one other year in the past half century has hosted so many sub-70-degree days up to this point in a summer season — 1969, when 14 such days occurred.
Wednesday’s paltry 65-degree high at O’Hare International Airport (an early-May-level temperature and a reading 18 degrees below normal) was also the city’s coolest July 8 high in 118 years — since a 61-degree high on the date in 1891.
Rains on Wednesday were bothersome but generally light in the city, where 0.20 inches fell at Midway Airport. Heavier rains were recorded well west and southwest of Chicago, including an unofficial report of 0.93 inches at DeKalb and 0.60 inches in Pontiac.
Sunshine re-emerges Thursday and should boost temperatures back into the 80s. Southeast winds off Lake Michigan will limit shoreline highs to the mid-and-upper 70s. An isolated thunderstorm may bubble to life in far western sections of the area late in the day
C’mon Anthony, you know this is just weather and has nothing to do with climate!
REPLY: C’mon Trevor read before you bark. – Anthony
As a native Chicagoan, I can’t help but notice the cold weather. Mid-July and it doesn’t get above 70 degrees.? Yikes.
Of course, there is a huge heat wave in the Texas area, so weather is not climate, but it does make you wonder.
And of course there are those for whom any unusual weather, even this type of cold spell, is evidence of global warming. Double Yikes!
Craig
Interesting story, the rising anomalies on the UAH site which is rising again without dropping before (channel 5) seems to want to imply record cold not happening so much right now, but there’s still a fair bit of it.
Also, we’ve gone a third day with the temps. falling well short of the forecast (if you use the Jabara Airport and more reliable station readings). And the biggest difference for today was clear skies all afternoon, they just stalled at noon and didn’t get much higher the rest of the day.
Also, Intellicast’s forecast map shows some unseasonable chill in store for all of Eastern Canada.
A non-existent Spring in Southern New England – a chilly “summer”…. I sit in a lotus position, breathe deeply through my nose, hold it, then exhale slowly through my mouth, chanting the sacred mantra “Weather is not climate. Weather is not climate. Weather is…..”
Easy there pardner … we’ve had several breaks in this ‘heat wave’ on account of unseasonable rains occurring too, so it hasn’t exactly been one long hot dryspell as we’ve seen in previous years (at least in the NcTX area) …
.
.
.
This is common. Of course they say this exactly what they expect.
According to forecasting models, we are going to experience a major heat wave in Hungary next week. I am sure this event will be linked to AGW by our media outlets.
In other words, it is almost certain that the oncoming heat wave will be treated as ‘climate’. The cooler than normal and rainy conditions of the past 3-4 weeks were just ‘weather’.
_Jim (17:15:59) : “Easy there pardner … we’ve had several breaks in this ‘heat wave’…”
No breaks, no rain in South Texas. Again it’s triple digits (°F).
Anthony. Have you noticed the MJO has been very unusual this past month or so? Almost retrograde, in a sense. http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_mjo_index/mjo_index.html
This seems like a good place to point out that a place’s climate is the long term pattern of the weather. Do you usually have hot/wet summers and cold/snowy winters, or perhaps mild/dry summers and cool/wet winters? World maps, and more precise regional maps, of these patterns have been available for years (see Köppen). When conceptualized in this way, is anyone claiming that the climate where they live has changed in the last fifty years?
Sounds like beautiful weather!
Well if you measure theTemperature at your back door every day, and record it for 100 years, then on any future day, you might expect about one chance in 100 that the temperature that day, will be a new record high; or perhaps a new record low; or a new maximum rainfall, or so on.
So after 100 years you might get 3.65 new record highs each year, and 3.65 new record lows also.
So you just report you new records, and people thing the climate is going one way or the other.
The solution is to just not bother to record the temperature; measure it to see if it is comfortable to go out, and then discard it.
Then you can live happily.
And for Buffalo, the count is 13 days since 1 June that temps failed to at least reach 70°. Interesting weather – wish we had some of that global warming thingie those media types keep drooling about.
Here on Long Island, I have still not run my AC and have not watered my lawn. Neither, not once. I have never before even come close to the July 4th without doing both. It’s July 9th and I’m sitting here in sweatpants (had to change out of my shorts) warming myself with my laptop because I refuse to turn on the heat on general principle.
Incredible.
Mosher: How does MJO affect the short term weather worldwide, what does it do, and how will this affect global temps. for the next few months or so?
I don’t know what effect it has.
Southeast Texas has been under High Pressure for about 6 weeks, much like 1980, when we had numerous days in a row above 100F, The current high temperatures sure look like weather to me. The High Pressure moved away a couple of days ago and we had a much needed rain.
OT but perhaps of interest, a huge wind tubine generator project has been postponed for a few years by Boone Pickens due to poor economics and desire for the State of Texas to build a $4.5 billion transmission line to West Texas
Forecast for San Jose, CA for July 11 … high of 75. We have had quite a pleasant summer here with only a few days over 90.
Adam. Just some casual observations i have made, over the years. Our weather ( Calif.), comes from the west. Evidently, the MJO starts in the Indian Ocean, and propogates Eastward. I can anticipate a change in the weather by watching the Eastward movement, as shown in the charts. Blue tending toward cooler temps and brown/red toward higher temps. Unusual now in that you can see that normally this process peters out once the MJO reaches about 40w. The current MJO has tended toward enhanced convection, in my area, for some, and has been a little unusual in it’s duration and movement, IMHO. I am not an expert on MJO by any means……fm
Chicago, Illinois makes for a good study in the climate change challenge between the CO2 manmade model vs. the natural climate change. Please allow me to explain. The computer models of the CO2 theory predicted both warmer summers and winters for Chicago, but real data does not verify this prediction. Has Chicago, IL measured more 90˚F temperatures during the summers since the 1930’s? NO, the temperatures have shown a downward trend since the 1930’s, opposite of the trend of CO2 levels. This is surprising considering the increasing of both the urban heat island effect and temperature instrument error. Our winters for the last 20 years have not warmed-up, in fact each of the last two winters piled over 60 inches of snow, which both are in our top 10 most ever recorded. In addition, the most recent 18 months set a record for the most amount of precipitation in the last 138 years of weather monitoring. Lots of low rain producing clouds are also increasing our nighttime temperatures. During the same time frame, the solar magnetic output dropped to it’s lowest level ever recorded by satellites, and the incoming cosmic rays penetrating Earth at near record high levels. Putting it all together, it makes for a good endorsement of Dr. Svensmark theory stating that the key amplifier is cosmic rays, and that they have more effect on the climate than manmade CO2. The Sun’s solar magnetic wind protects us from incoming cosmic rays bombarding the rest of the universe. As you read this sentence, about two cosmic rays have gone through your body right now. When the Sun is weak, more cosmic rays get through Earth’s magnetosphere and atmosphere and produce measurable Be–10 & C-14 isotopes. There is direct relationship between 30 years of weather satellites measuring low clouds and cosmic rays: Yes, higher cosmic rays = 14% more low clouds . Why this result? Once the cosmic ray penetrates the lower troposphere, they ionize air molecules and create the perfect cloud nuclei. These cloud nuclei then produce low wet clouds that reflect incoming solar radiation, which then COOLS the Earth. Cooler oceans change the jet stream pattern, which changes the weather globally. In addition, these low wet clouds are so good at precipitation that the higher cirrus clouds that warm the Earth’s atmosphere do not form as often. As this theory predicted due to near record setting cosmic rays levels, 2008 was the single largest drop in global temperatures since 1875. The more I learn about Dr. Svensmark cosmic ray theory, the more I believe that he is on the right track. Thank you Anthony Watts and fellow bloggers for educating me on these matters as I will be most interested the results of the upcoming CERN Cloud experiment. What are your thoughts?
Gary from Chi. Good points. In knowledge of cause and effect, we have just made out the tip of the iceberg, IMHO.
Weather isn’t climate, it’s an integral part of climate.
When it runs out of your 50 year norms and into areas where it was the norm 50 years earlier, then it is a change.
Some places have 150 years or more of records.
When your weather starts acting like it was 100 years ago, when the old settlers were heard to ask “is our climate changing”, it tells you that it has changed before.
Then, the natives were known to have told the settlers of a different clmate that existed before they arrived.
When NCDC digs up evidence of the Columbia River basin going on the dry side for a decade or two in 1800 and again in 1840’s, it tells you of things being far different than they are today.
Makes you appreciate how good we got it now.
Now the quetion is: Where are we?
Are we in today’s climate with an anomaly, or is this a harbinger of change to a different climate?
This happened in the Dayton/Cinci area of Ohio on July 2nd(not 100% on that, maybe 1st or 3rd). Tied the record low high temp. I was actually surprised that they mentioned it on tv.
JFD (18:37:55) : “…a huge wind tu(r)bine generator project has been postponed for a few years by Boone Pickens due to poor economics and desire for the State of Texas to build a $4.5 billion transmission line to West Texas.”
Quoting Pickens: “…transmission issues and the problem with the capital markets make that unfeasible at this point…”
You mean with all those hundreds of billions of Drunken Sailor Stimulus money bouncing around out there, T. Boone can’t scrape together a measly $4.5 billion for his own transmission system? Oh, wait. The spendulus sucked money out of the economy to pay for really important stuff, like climate models. Well, all T. Boone would have done is frittered it away to create wealth or something stupid like that.
Conversely, it’s interesting to observe how arctic sea ice loss has accelerated in the last two months.
To: Gary from Chicagoland (19:04:20) :
——————-
That was just magnificent!
.
So then, and it’s been as I’ve always thought: The AGW crowd are proceeding ~entirely~ in a vacuum.
.
That is, they are analyzing local (Earth) weather effects without the slightest idea of what might be causing those effects.
.
That is not unlike back in the dark ages when you got to blame someone for an illness, merely that they happened to have looked at you strangely, i.e., the ‘evil eye.’
.
I will suppose then, we’ll likely witness ‘witchcraft’ trials in the very near future …
Gary from Chicagoland (19:04:20) :
The Oulu website, http://cosmicrays.oulu.fi/,
is still showing a record neutron count with a couple recent tiny dips. Does it respond that quickly to the few sunspots we have seen recently?
The Ap geomagnetic index is up slightly from January.
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/ftpdir/weekly/Ap.gif
I guess we all wait to see what solar cycle 24 does.
If your head is in the freeser and your butt in the stove, on average your allright
C’mon Trevor read before you bark. – Anthony
I did, my (/sarc) that I placed at the end didn’t come out, force of habit putting it in tags. 🙂
Gary P (20:21:02) :
Oulu Cosmic Rays is still showing a record neutron count with a couple recent tiny dips. Does it respond that quickly to the few sunspots we have seen recently?
Almost all neutron monitors [incl. Oulu] have begun to trend down. This is to be expected as the downturn should come 6-12 months after solar minimum which we passed sometime last autumn, so everything makes sense. The latest spate of spots will not have any effect for some time.
The Ap geomagnetic index is up slightly from January.
When checking Ap, remember that there is a 25% semiannual variation.
I guess we all wait to see what solar cycle 24 does.
ain’t that the truth. But it is not at all certain that the solar cycle has anything to do with the climate beyond a [hardly measurable against the natural background noise] 0.07C degree solar cycle variation.
Same sort of thing happening here in Colorado. June was the second wettest June since 1872 (missed the record by 0.1 inches), and June was -3.2 deg F below normal. So far this summer we have had only 2 days over 90 deg F here in Denver as of July 8.
I have also noticed that it seems the forecasts tend to always over shoot the actual highs for the day. The Forecast for yesterday was for a high of 95, but it only hit 90 at the official location, and here on the west side of town it was in the high 70’s late in the afternoon, only hitting the 80’s well after the normal peak heat of the day.
If my perception is accurate, that would imply that the forecast models are anticipating higher heating each day that we are seeing, which would imply that their forecasting rules are not matching up with reality for some reason.
It would be interesting to see if others are seeing a similar pattern that the forecast for the next day high temp tends to miss the mark low more often than you would expect from a random error and might indicate the forecasts have a warm bias.
This is an “unscientific” observation, just a perception from several days where my activities depended on reaching certain high temps (for example I was painting a roof yesterday and needed good hot weather to cure the paint properly). This afternoon as I was finishing up, it was so cool and over cast near noon I contemplated knocking off early because I suspected it might cloud up and rain or be so cool the paint would not dry properly before morning dew set in.
As you can see below for July the departure from normal is dominated by negative departures.
================
000
CXUS55 KBOU 091014
CF6DEN
PRELIMINARY LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA (WS FORM: F-6)
STATION: DENVER CO
MONTH: JULY
YEAR: 2009
LATITUDE: 39 52 N
LONGITUDE: 104 40 W
TEMPERATURE IN F: :PCPN: SNOW: WIND :SUNSHINE: SKY :PK WND
================================================================================
1 2 3 4 5 6A 6B 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
12Z AVG MX 2MIN
DY MAX MIN AVG DEP HDD CDD WTR SNW DPTH SPD SPD DIR MIN PSBL S-S WX SPD DR
================================================================================
1 92 57 75 3 0 10 0.04 0.0 0 9.9 33 350 720 80 4 13 39 360
2 79 56 68 -4 0 3 T 0.0 0 8.6 29 180 420 47 5 3 36 180
3 87 61 74 2 0 9 0.01 0.0 0 7.1 36 320 562 63 6 3 47 330
4 77 54 66 -6 0 1 0.19 0.0 0 8.2 28 20 522 58 8 13 38 20
5 78 52 65 -7 0 0 0.30 0.0 0 7.0 26 240 518 58 6 13 31 230
6 84 54 69 -3 0 4 0.03 0.0 0 7.9 31 20 628 70 5 13 41 10
7 87 56 72 -1 0 7 0.00 0.0 0 7.8 21 70 870 98 4 26 70
8 90 56 73 0 0 8 0.00 0.0 0 8.1 16 120 840 94 2 20 120
================================================================================
SM 674 446 0 42 0.57 0.0 64.6 5080 40
================================================================================
AV 84.2 55.8 8.1 FASTST 606 68 5 MAX(MPH)
MISC —-> # 36 320 7148 71 # 47 330
================================================================================
NOTES: SUNSHINE DATA ARE RECORDED BY COOP OBSERVERS AT THE FORMER STAPLETON
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.
# LAST OF SEVERAL OCCURRENCES
COLUMN 17 PEAK WIND IN M.P.H.
PRELIMINARY LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA (WS FORM: F-6) , PAGE 2
STATION: DENVER CO
MONTH: JULY
YEAR: 2009
LATITUDE: 39 52 N
LONGITUDE: 104 40 W
[TEMPERATURE DATA] [PRECIPITATION DATA] SYMBOLS USED IN COLUMN 16
AVERAGE MONTHLY: 70.0 TOTAL FOR MONTH: 0.57 1 = FOG OR MIST
DPTR FM NORMAL: -2.2 DPTR FM NORMAL: 0.05 2 = FOG REDUCING VISIBILITY
HIGHEST: 92 ON 1 GRTST 24HR 0.40 ON 4- 5 TO 1/4 MILE OR LESS
LOWEST: 52 ON 5 3 = THUNDER
SNOW, ICE PELLETS, HAIL 4 = ICE PELLETS
TOTAL MONTH: 0.0 INCH 5 = HAIL
GRTST 24HR 0.0 6 = FREEZING RAIN OR DRIZZLE
GRTST DEPTH: 0 7 = DUSTSTORM OR SANDSTORM:
VSBY 1/2 MILE OR LESS
8 = SMOKE OR HAZE
[NO. OF DAYS WITH] [WEATHER – DAYS WITH] 9 = BLOWING SNOW
X = TORNADO
MAX 32 OR BELOW: 0 0.01 INCH OR MORE: 5
MAX 90 OR ABOVE: 2 0.10 INCH OR MORE: 2
MIN 32 OR BELOW: 0 0.50 INCH OR MORE: 0
MIN 0 OR BELOW: 0 1.00 INCH OR MORE: 0
[HDD (BASE 65) ]
TOTAL THIS MO. 0 CLEAR (SCALE 0-3) 1
DPTR FM NORMAL -1 PTCLDY (SCALE 4-7) 7
TOTAL FM JUL 1 0 CLOUDY (SCALE 8-10) 0
DPTR FM NORMAL -1
[CDD (BASE 65) ]
TOTAL THIS MO. 42
DPTR FM NORMAL -18 [PRESSURE DATA]
TOTAL FM JAN 1 136 HIGHEST SLP M ON M
DPTR FM NORMAL -85 LOWEST SLP 29.63 ON 8
=================
Larry
The Warmist propaganda machine is quick to jump on any ‘record high temperature’ reports. I don’t see anything wrong with reporting this.
Leif Svalgaard (20:57:03) :
But it is not at all certain that the solar cycle has anything to do with the climate beyond a [hardly measurable against the natural background noise] 0.07C degree solar cycle variation.
You forgot to multiply that by 22/7R^2 for the positive feedbacks. Sorry, lame but I just like to say pi r squared. It is true, yet not at the same time. 🙂
How is it determined that there are no feedbacks to solar forcing?
We won’t see these events mentioned in mainstream media however, only ones which show a higher temperature than “average”. Well said G. E. Smith.
ohioholic (21:34:51) :
How is it determined that there are no feedbacks to solar forcing?
Because it has been hard to show that there is a larger signal, that everyone [or most] can agree on [a hallmark of accepted fact 🙂 ]
Madman (17:03:37) :
The Texas Panhandle has been free of the heat wave until this week. Very wet June, and the high (the one that sets in over Texas every summer) has just expanded up our way. Lots of cool temps in that period, and the night of the Fourth, everyone was putting on jackets to watch fireworks.
Leif Svalgaard (20:57:03) :
“But it is not at all certain that the solar cycle has anything to do with the climate beyond a [hardly measurable against the natural background noise] 0.07C degree solar cycle variation.”
Dr Svalgaard, we of course respect your client, Mr. Sun’s right to scientific representation and we appreciate your participation in these informal interviews. As you may be aware Mr. Carbon was formally charged with carrying heat after investigations into climate irregularities. We now find that we need to reopen investigations, as a key witness against Mr. Carbon has been found to be a heavy abuser of Bristlecone pine extract. While we are prepared to overlook minor variations in TSI levels, which your client claims relate to personal use, we feel that this does raise questions about Mr. Sun’s character. We also have unconfirmed reports linking some of Mr. Sun’s activities with known heavies such as Mr. Jupiter. In light of this information we would like to ask that Mr. Sun surrender his passport and remain contactable should we need further assistance with our inquiries. 🙂
Is this a question of which has more influence over the Earths climate?
…and the two answers are…
A. The sun, our nearest star and powerplant of the entire solar system, or…
B. The 0.000038 (380- millionths) of CO2 in the Earths atmosphere
…man, that is a toughie!
Leif Svalgaard (21:47:36) :
I assume that means that most things have been looked at, and all that is left is unconventional stuff like cosmic rays? I wondered if you have read Gregory Ryskin’s paper on the ocean flipping the magnetic fields?
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1367-2630/11/6/063015/njp9_6_063015.html
That is some unconventional thinking. It also made me ponder if those flux events could somehow charge the oceans for just this sort of thing.
Condsidering UHI accounts for 4F … wow! Probably the coldest since the last minimum.
I just saw on the Los Angeles news about 5 minutes ago that tomorrow we could break a record for the most consecutive days below average temperature, with today having been day 50 of below average temperatures! Can’t believe they are even reporting that here in Los Angeles….maybe that is the “hip” new trend…reporting on LOW temps. I personally will take the lower temps…it’s usually over 100 every day at this time of year in my area of LA. (There can be 20 or even 30 degree differences within the city of LA on any given day due to valley, mountain and beach areas)
I have an agenda. I fully admit it. My agenda is to take the money that is going to be spent on a non-problem, and spend it on a real problem that makes my blood boil. Child molestation and child pornography. As a parent, this is a far more pressing issue in todays society than the idiocy of trying to control our climate. The pro-AGW contingent claims that we should reduce Co2 for our children and grandchildren. What a farce. The money that will be thrown away could go to solving real problems instead. Let’s protect our children from creeps so they really can have a future, unscarred and unharmed. Imagine what a trillion dollars would do for officers in charge of crimes against children units around the country. Thank you for allowing me to rant. Anthony or moderators, delete if you see fit, …..
Hello from the Czech Republic. We are also experiencing colder than normal June – July so far. I was just wondering if it could be linked to Mt. Redoubt eruption. Does anyone know about it?
Regards. Jan
Weather is when the models can make a reasonable prediction for a few days and climate is what happens after that.
Konrad (22:11:09) :
we would like to ask that Mr. Sun surrender his passport and remain contactable should we need further assistance with our inquiries. 🙂
As his representative, I’m fully authorized to deny any misdeeds he might be accused of.
jorgekafkazar (19:50:29) :
Actually, he has sort of an excuse. The Environmentalists will throw every lawsuit you can imagine across your path if you dare to run a new transmission line, plus the public is very wary of high KV’s crossing thier land.
If you want to run new lines, expect a knock-down drag-out fight. You’ll get it.
“is anyone claiming that the climate where they live has changed in the last fifty years. Where I live the winters went from very cold and dry to warm and wet abruptly in 1988. I drew what for me was the obvious conclusion that this couldn’t be because of global warming because of the abrupt change. Last winter reverted to type.
Don’t forget the US is one of the few regions in the world having rightnow slightly lower-than-normal temperatures.
http://www.climat-evolution.com/article-33431441.html
Western Europe, Siberia, India, China, Alaska, etc. had quite large positive anomalies. Following this NCEP/NCAR reconstruction, the global anomaly was .5 (which should be close to the GISS one).
Here in South Bend, NOAA’s preliminary monthly summary has our mean temperature at 6.7° below normal. Chicago at O’Hare is -5.4°.
Does anyone know when NOAA will change their climate normals from 1971-2000? In 2011 to cover the period from 1981-2010? Thinking about it, if the overall cooler recent years were included, there wouldn’t be quite as much of a departure from the norm.
One other question: Has anyone calculated the average temperature for the past 30-40 years, omitting the coldest and warmest years and comparing that to previous records?
There are a lot of food plants that do not grow well at less than 70 F for prolonged periods. Gardens, and crop yields, are going to be low from Chicago north…
Crops are generally divided into “cool season” and “warm season” crops (with the added group of “tropical” for things that need consistently hot temperatures, but are normally not grown in the USA other than in Hawaii and Florida.)
The “cutoff” between the two ranges is not as precise as we might like, but it is at right about room temperature. About the Chicago temperatures…
Normally, “cool season” crops are only grown in late fall or early spring (or winter in places like California). “Warm season” crops are grown from late spring through summer. Corn, tomatoes, common beans and green beans, squash, melons (and more). None of these will do well at temperatures with cool nights and daytimes peaking below 70F.
You can get a good crop from cold season plants at those temperatures: Kale, peas, cabbages, spinach, some lettuces, radishes, turnips, potatoes. but only if you knew ahead of time that you needed to plant them…
I surely hope that farmers in the cooler regions can learn to adapt rapidly.
For me, only my purple pod “green beans” are producing. They are the most cold tolerant. Last year at this time I had more Kentucky Wonders than we could eat (I still have about 18 pints from the batch canned last year…) This year, I have some short K.W. plants with a few flowers, but no beans yet. I’ll be lucky to get yield by August… I have some cabbages that are still happy. “Normally” by July any cabbage plants I have left alive are dying and drying out in the heat… I let these run to seed. They are now producing their second seed crop of the year. A bit bizarre…
This is the problem that gardeners and farmers all over the planet face. How to continue to produce food at the same levels as in the past while conditions change year to year. What make this even more difficult, is that there is a general reduction in yield with lower temperatures for any given plant. So you can grow something in the cold, just not as much as you could in the heat…
The upper limit is about 120F and above. Only a few plants are happy at those temperatures. At 110F all sorts of things are happy, including rice and peaches, as Anthony can attest near Chico. But as mid summer rises above 120 F and growth slows from heat stress, you gain growing time at the cooler ends of the seasons. This means that the planet would continue to produce more food until all of the growing areas are as hot as Phoenix Arizona… (Actually hotter. Break even is when heat stress loss in summer would be the same as cold loss in winter had been. For places like Nome that would be incredibly hot…)
We have lots of room to the “upside”; not so much to the low side. We start to lose crop yields as soon as temperatures drop at all. All crop growth pretty much halts at freezing. Think about it…
Anyone with a garden has a wonderful thermometer that integrates the degrees x days with fine precision and accuracy. Not all that surprising when you figure that you can make a clock based on flower opening times:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linnaeus'_flower_clock
and even determine your latitude… (onions, for example, come in different “day length” types that the set bulbs at particular lengths of day. So the date at which they form bulbs depends on your latitude…)
I’m very comfortable with my garden climate station. And it’s shouting at me that things are cool, and getting colder.
So I’m going to take my planting calendar and slide things in a month or two. Basically, this is now “late August, early September” compared to the past and it’s time for me to start planting my Fall garden Things that need a little heat to get started, but can “finish” in the cool of late fall / early winter.
I’m also going to be pulling my “short season” seeds to the top of the archive. 45 day tomatoes. 50 day corn. 25 day radishes. Oh, and I think I’ll start an early kale bed and try some buckwheat as a fast ‘catch crop’. No time like the present to start preparing…
Chicago gardeners need to start looking at “winter crops”…
BTW, China is demanding a currency system overhaul (per CNBC World) and seem to have figured out that the US Dollar is in trouble (i.e. they want to dump their dollars, but no so anyone notices them doing it). Watching the G8 meeting will be interesting. There is exactly zero chance of getting China to buy into the AGW agenda. Go China!
I morally disagree with the popular comments that “something is just weather not climate”. It is true in the sense that one can isolate “weather” and “climate” questions, to some extent, according to the timescales.
However, what’s wrong is the hidden indication that the “weather” doesn’t matter while the “climate” does. It’s just false. In the real life of any human, animal, plant, company, or nation, what matters at any moment is the weather.
If the climate were “significantly” warming, according to a practically meaningful definition of “significantly”, that would inevitably mean that the frequency of cold records would plummet rapidly – according to a Gaussian profile. Why?
Well, if you imagine that the temperatures oscillate with normal distribution around a “central” value but this “cental” value also has an increasing trend, it is clear that the probability distribution for temperature “T” in the year “Y” will be schematically of the form exp(-(Y-T)^2). So if you choose a record low “T” you want to break, the probability that you break it decreases as exp(-Y^2) with the year, with some constants inside.
The warming becomes significant exactly at the point when this exponential starts to become essentially zero, faster than exponentially. So if we’re still observing record low temperatures essentially as frequently as we would expect in a stationary random world, it simply means that the climate is not significantly warming.
The weather is perhaps not the climate, but it is the weather, and not the climate (a hypothetical long-term abstraction of the weather), that actually matters and influences the people and events. The fluctuations of the “weather” by 10 degrees of Celsius – in days or weeks – are real and the fact that people and others can easily survive it simply means that changes comparable to 10 degrees are not such a big deal. That’s why it is completely ludicrous to talk about practical consequences of a temperature change by 1 or 2 °C per century.
There won’t be any. Only sophisticated statistical analysis involving average over the Earth as well as time is needed to observe such small changes, and even with this analysis, such a change remains controversial because it’s too small relatively to the errors. A normal being located at a random place or trajectory on the planet can’t possibly reliably detect such a change, and even if she could detect it, it can’t visibly influence her, especially not with a sign that could be predictably negative.
vibenna (19:56:16) : Conversely, it’s interesting to observe how arctic sea ice loss has accelerated in the last two months.
You mean like it does every single year at this time? It’s dead center of the pack and absolutely normal. This after all the hand wringing over it being “first year ice” (oh no!).
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
So I guess it’s interesting if you like watching things sitting on the exact top of the bell curve…
I suppose there are some interesting things about arctic ice loss being driven by water rather than air, so we have this really cold air over Canada and down to Chicago, but that doesn’t slow the ice melt because the water temp is what does that. I suppose it’s an interesting existence proof of the low relevance of air temp to arctic ice cycling…
E.M.Smith (23:54:25) : I suppose it’s an interesting existence proof of the low relevance of air temp to arctic ice cycling…
Which makes me wonder even more why GIStemp uses arctic ice to proxy up some fake thermometers where their are non based on ice extent… Hmmm… Using artice ice to proxy temperatures is an interesting fudge…
ohioholic (22:21:18) :
Gregory Ryskin’s paper on the ocean flipping the magnetic fields?
The oceans are weakly conducting and their magnetic effect has been known for a century. It is, however, much too small to account for the major secular changes. For example, the Earth’s dipole moment has been decreasing 5%/century for quite some time. This is unlikely to be caused by oceans, that have stayed rather the same over a long time.
So then here are the ……
IPCC definitions of probability of occurrence
Virtually certain: more than 99%
Extremely likely: more than 95%
Very likely: more than 90%
Likely: more than 66%
More likely than not: more than 50%
Very unlikely: less than 10%
Extremely unlikely: less than 5%
(source BBC News – UK)
E.M. Smith: you see it as the exact centre of the Bell curve. I see as the fourth equal lowest seasonal value since 1978. Also, the lowest five seasonal values are all in the last five years. See this link at cyrosphere today for a longer history with more perspective:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.jpg
I blame all the volcanos.
@Leif Svalgaard
Almost all neutron monitors [incl. Oulu] have begun to trend down. This is to be expected as the downturn should come 6-12 months after solar minimum which we passed sometime last autumn, so everything makes sense. The latest spate of spots will not have any effect for some time.
Really? I’ve just downloaded the neutron counts from November 1978 to date and they’re just beginning a very slight fall but are still much higher than the entire record over that time. The “fall” is very much within the normal variation of the neutron counts and means nothing.
Proof
Its been fairly cool here in Idaho too. We had a few hot days, but mostly I bet we are running along temps seen here about 1980’s .. So Id say rather than being abnormally cool, were back to normal:)
Nites are still fairly cool, and my apple tree and grapes are ahead of season, maybe the trees know something we dont. Looks like they will be ripe before usual after a late bloom.
Leif Svalgaard (20:57:03) :
But it is not at all certain that the solar cycle has anything to do with the climate beyond a [hardly measurable against the natural background noise] 0.07C degree solar cycle variation.
The on average 0.07C rise and fall of SST in response to the solar cycle is the transient response of the near surface waters. What about the longer term thermal expansion of the oceans as measured by satellite altimetry? An awful lot of heat energy has to get stored over multi-decadal periods in the oceans deeper down towards the thermocline to do that. Logic demands it. Observation of ocean heat content confirms it.
The variation between cycles isn’t just max amplitude, it’s also length of intervening minima and slope of rise and fall in TSI. This varies much more than the transient surface response indicates. You agreed with me on this on the last ‘solar signal in temperature data’ thread, but now you seem to have forgotten or disregarded it again.
Flanagan (23:24:43) :
Don’t forget the US is one of the few regions in the world having rightnow slightly lower-than-normal temperatures.
I think quite a few aussies and new zealanders might disagree. There again maybe not. They would say they haven’t been having [b]slightly[/b] lower-than-normal temperatures, they’ve been having [b]much[/b] lower-than-normal temperatures.
Konrad (22:11:09) :
we would like to ask that Mr. Sun surrender his passport and remain contactable should we need further assistance with our inquiries. 🙂
Leif Svalgaard (22:52:16) :
As his representative, I’m fully authorized to deny any misdeeds he might be accused of.
Your client appears to be a very popular party animal based upon the number of paternity suits you are defending in open forum at the moment.
Would your client be willing to provide a DNA sample so that we can establish whether he is in fact the father of poor little orphan Joe Doe Climate?
Have a great weekend!
PS
My girlfriend is heading off to the beach this weekend…
She will be wearing a bikini and hopes to attract the attention of your client…
I look forward to reading more hot gossip next week… thank you guys.
“tallbloke (01:56:09) :
Flanagan (23:24:43) :
Don’t forget the US is one of the few regions in the world having rightnow slightly lower-than-normal temperatures.
I think quite a few aussies and new zealanders might disagree. There again maybe not. They would say they haven’t been having [b]slightly[/b] lower-than-normal temperatures, they’ve been having [b]much[/b] lower-than-normal temperatures.”
I do disagree, although I am British and a New Zealander living in Australia now as a permanent resident.
May was, 0.08c above the long term agverage (That is the BoM long term average, the 1960 – 1991 global average). We had early snows in May and June, many lows in June, and now in July, 4-6c below average so far (I really dislike quoting real temps with average temps, it’s not a valid comparison IMO).
Don’t forget this is winter time here.
Temperatures were well below average during June, the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) climate summary says.
Extremely low temperatures were recorded in the Waikato, Taumarunui, Taupo, southern Hawke’s Bay, Central Otago, the Kaikoura Coast, and some alpine areas of the South Island.
All other areas experienced below average temperatures and the national average temperature of 7.5degC was 0.7degC below the long-term average for June.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10582082
Weather isn’t climate but it sure is oddly cold here in Chicago. I mentioned it in my last comment on another thread. H/T – blind squirrel.
…temperature at Hamburg/Germany dropped to 55°F at 12:00 LTC. Probably becaus a nearby nuclear powerplant was shut off due to a transformer failure 😉
Temps in the 60s? I’m jealous!
Here in North Germany we’ve had highs in the 50s only.
This morning it felt like October.
I don’t recall having such cool weather in July since being here.
A little bit offtopic, but finally the RSS MSU global temperature anomaly for June 2009 is available now.
RSS June 2009 value is 0.075 deg.C above normal, with the highest anomaly in the Tropics and the polar regions. Both southern and northern hemisphere values (excluding the tropics but including polar regions) were slightly below normal, suggesting a negative anomaly of about -0.2°c for mid-latitudes on both hemispheres.
Global 0.075
Tropics 0.228 (20N-20S)
N_hem -0.016 (20-82.5N)
S_hem -0.001 (20-70S)
Arctic 0.206 (60-82.5N)
Antarctic 0.494 (60-70S)
Altough the RSS value is significantly higher than UAH, it confirms the small decrease in global temperatures compared to May.
RSS monthly data is available here.
I’ve just realized that there is a significant discrepancy between UAH and RSS in the case of the Tropics:
June 2009 value according to UAH is -0.003°c
June 2009 value according to RSS is 0.228°c
What could be the reason for this relatively large difference between the two satellite records in one particular region, while both SH and NH values are identical? Any opinion?
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/44463
Deroy Murdoch’s column reinforces this post !!
Lubos Motl
Good post. Another take on this is that most things in Nature occur in cycles . To recognize long term cycle changes among short term events or signals is true wisdom. We are seeing the early signs of a cooler cycle among the tail end of the warm cycle . Only a fool will say that when there is a nip in the air and the leaves start changing colour early that summer[or global warming] will last indefinitely.
E.M.Smith (23:38:35) :
Thanks for the posting and the link.
Interesting information.
Konrad (22:11:09) :
Leif Svalgaard (22:52:16) :
Konrad, Leif,
very funny, indeed.
Lubos Motl (23:50:01) :
Thank for your posting.
I think you are correct with your climate weather assessment.
Why is it when it hot it ‘s global warming of course but if it cool ,as it has been in the mid west and the north east this summer , NOT A WORD IS SAID.I live in the northern foothills of North Carolina and we have had a few days in the low 90’s ,mostly low to mid 80’s,but the humidity we normally see has’t been here .It’s more like spring or fall than summer.
Flanagan (23:24:43) :
Don’t forget the US is one of the few regions in the world having
rightnow slightly lower-than-normal temperatures.
http://www.climat-evolution.com/article-33431441.html
Western Europe, Siberia, India, China, Alaska, etc. had quite large ….
—-
whaddabout Western Europe?
Dec to Feb (DJF) – did belong to the three coldest of the last 30 years.
Locally we had quite some new record lows.
March was 52nd warmest out of 110 .
April was indeed, warm. 2nd out of 110
May was more to average.
June was rather old.
July looks alike he will come wet, cold, wet,cold.
“matt v. (04:46:03) :
Lubos Motl
Good post. Another take on this is that most things in Nature occur in cycles . To recognize long term cycle changes among short term events or signals is true wisdom. We are seeing the early signs of a cooler cycle among the tail end of the warm cycle . Only a fool will say that when there is a nip in the air and the leaves start changing colour early that summer[or global warming] will last indefinitely.”
Sorry, you are wrong. *ALL* things in Nature occur in cycles. I do not know of anything, in Nature, that is not cyclical. Day, night. Moon, Sun. Winter, Summer etc etc…all cycles. Our whole being, as homosapiens, is cyclical. If the cycle didn’t change, “Lucy”, and probably “us”, would still be in trees.
Leif Svalgaard (00:13:57) :
ohioholic (22:21:18) :
I read Ryskin’s paper (quickly!). I think he is claiming that the short term small fluctuations in the earth’s magnetic field are due to ocean currents. He is not claiming that the currents can cause the field to flip or even change its magnitude significantly.
Gary from Chicagoland (19:04:20)
At low altitudes there is plenty of dust to act as CCNs. Clouds can only form if the air hass sufficient water vapour for the surrounding temperature.
How much more efficient is a cosmic ray, compared to a dust particle, at creating a cloud?
Joe (22:19:29) : Please be sensible as Leif has ponted out the output from the sun is relatively constant only changing the temp by 0.07C from peak to min output.
If I were to dose a half litre of water with 1*10e-6 grammes of Botulinin toxin D (LD50 of 0.04ug/100kg body weight) would you drink it?
It is after all only 0.002ppm and can surely have no effect whatsoever.
Ozone has even less presence in the atmosphere than CO2 but greatly reduces UV hittin the planet.
Just because the number is small it does not mean that it is insignificant!
“Jack Hughes (02:42:00) :
Don’t forget this is winter time here.
Temperatures were well below average during June, the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) climate summary says.
Extremely low temperatures were recorded in the Waikato, Taumarunui, Taupo, southern Hawke’s Bay, Central Otago, the Kaikoura Coast, and some alpine areas of the South Island.
All other areas experienced below average temperatures and the national average temperature of 7.5degC was 0.7degC below the long-term average for June.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10582082”
Jack, are you in New Zealand? I’d give NIWA as much respect in it’s ability to do any real science as I would if I stepped in dog/cow/sheep excrement.
The G8 took one sane decision this week, boosting food supplies.
Unfortunately the budget will be handed over to the UN.
This is a guarantee for failure.
Don’t be surprised if a major part of the 15 billion dollar budged emerges again as anti meat propaganda and AGW/Climate Change promotion.
Like environmental organizations like WWF and Greenpeace who went political years ago, organizations like Oxfam develop all kinds of activities neglecting their core business. Instead of agricultural development with modern tools and techniques they serve the following motto: Every dollar we spend will keep Afrika Hungry.
If you don’t like it, send a lawyer.
Adam Soereg (03:31:02) :
I’ve just realized that there is a significant discrepancy between UAH and RSS in the case of the Tropics:
June 2009 value according to UAH is -0.003°c
June 2009 value according to RSS is 0.228°c
What could be the reason for this relatively large difference between the two satellite records in one particular region, while both SH and NH values are identical? Any opinion?
I’ve been told UAH anomalies tend to be on the low side compared to other indices at this time of year. Whether Roy Spencer or John Christy have commented on that I’m not sure, but if you asked them to, they might.
Meteorological Summer here in Hew Hampshire has been surprisingly wet and cool.
From NOAA:
“JUNE 2009 IN CONCORD WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR BEING VERY WET AND COOL.
THERE WAS NEARLY SIX AND A HALF INCHES OF RAIN /6.46 INCHES/ IN
CONCORD THIS JUNE. THIS RANKS AS THE TENTH WETTEST JUNE IN THE PAST
142 YEARS AND WAS MORE THAN DOUBLE THE NORMAL JUNE RAINFALL.
ALTOGETHER THERE WERE 18 DAYS OUT
OF 30 WITH A TRACE OR MORE RAINFALL.
JUNE WAS COOLER THAN NORMAL WITH AN AVERAGE TEMPERATURE OF 63.0
DEGREES. THIS WAS 1.9 DEGREES BELOW NORMAL”
This has continued into July, though we are just now going into some closer to normal summer weather (though still slightly below-normal temps). The cool, rainy weather has adversely affected many crops in the State.
I would also like to point something out about temperature averages. With all of the cloudy, rainy days we’ve been having, obviously daytime highs have been much lower than average – I don’t have the actual figures handy, but I believe I saw they were some 6 Deg. below average. However, nighttime lows have been somewhat higher than normal, due to the cloud cover, thus giving the average of only 1.9 Deg. below normal which is a bit deceiving. The rainy, cool weather has hit the tourist industry especially hard, but also construction (what little of it is going on). We have not turned on our heat out of principle, but there have been many days with temps barely reaching 60 Deg, with no sun to even give us our passive solar (we have a house with southern exposure). I am sure others, though, have had to resort to heating. This may indeed be remembered as the “year without a summer”.
hotrod (21:11:47) It has been similar on the western slope, outside Carbondale to be more specific. Having lived in the same spot for 17 years, I saw the first twelve with two days over those years at 90° or above during that whole time. Then, we had a few by 2003 on, increasing to dozens of days by 2007. This year the warmest it has hit is 88°, just once. July 4th hit the low 70s, until a shower dropped it to the 50s by midafternoon, coolest 4th I’ve ever seen. The nights are cooler this summer too, historically in the low 50s, it’s been consistantly below 50°, and usually low 40s. But it’s just weather.
Patrick Davis, “Sorry, you are wrong. *ALL* things in Nature occur in cycles.”
And that is why climate models don’t work. We don’t know all the cycles, we don’t know the variability of the cycles and therefore, we cannot program computers that will derive a trend one way or another.
Is there a cycle for vulcanism on the planet? If so has anyone accurately determined it so that it can be programmed into a model? Don’t think so.
Too many cycles, too many variables, too many people in high places with brain lock on their own opinions without regard to the facts.
Meanwhile, NOAA is still cranking out its alarmist garbage with its “Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States”: http://www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/us-impacts
If CO2 is warming the earth, where is the heat?
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/06/the-antidote-to-150-million-quadrillion-joules/
“Sorry, you are wrong. *ALL* things in Nature occur in cycles. I do not know of anything, in Nature, that is not cyclical.”
Never assert a negative. The Milankovich (sp?) cycles are not really cycles at all, since the variations in obliquity of the Earth are influenced by the orbit of the Moon, which is receding from the Earth at a slow but steady pace, never to come back. In other words, they will never repeat exactly, and they are known, as well as we can know anything about the climate, to produce major climate forcing changes.
Continental drift affects climate. It is not cyclical either.
I think this entire thread about being colder in some places Chicago but warmer in others is the best example of why an “average” global temperature makes no sense and and the miniscule +/- anomolies from that “average” make even less sense. Of course my livelyhood doesn’t depend on government or foundation grants.
” Flanagan (23:24:43) :
Don’t forget the US is one of the few regions in the world having rightnow slightly lower-than-normal temperatures.”
Not so.
http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/climate/synop/td20090708_e.png
Canada, Western Australia, Southeast Asia, and Central Asia (just virtually smooth the sparse blue dots in Central Asia, like GISS would) are all enjoying cooler than normal weather the week past. By my estimation, that image has it split about half and half (geographically): half above average, and half below average. Let’s see, that works out to what? Normal!
John A (01:03:17) :
they’re just beginning a very slight fall but are still much higher than the entire record over that time. The “fall” is very much within the normal variation of the neutron counts and means nothing.
Different stations see slightly different counts and the long term record is hard to keep at a constant calibration [Oulu is a habitual offender]. You have to look at many stations to get the true picture, e.g. [for the recent values] http://www.leif.org/research/Neutron-Monitors-Real-Time.htm
and some for the long-term trends:
http://www.puk.ac.za/opencms/export/PUK/html/fakulteite/natuur/nm_data/data/hermanus_e.html
or http://www.leif.org/research/Kiel-Cosmic-Rays.png
The cosmic ray intensity at each solar minimum [or rather 6-12 months later] returns to close to the same value, corresponding to minimum modulation. If anything there is a slight decrease of the intensity over time.
Paul Linsay (05:49:34) :
He is not claiming that the currents can cause the field to flip or even change its magnitude significantly.
But ohioholic (22:21:18) was, and that was my point.
tallbloke (01:41:49) :
An awful lot of heat energy has to get stored over multi-decadal periods
The heat stored has little to do with the atmospheric temperature or SST. Imagine that the only thing that happened is that TSI suddenly increased 0.1% and then stayed constant thereafter indefinitely at this higher level. The temperature would in a few months rise 0.07C and stay at that level indefinitely while the ocean [and the solid Earth] underneath slowly warms up as this extra heat slowly penetrates ever deeper. The temperature stays the same, no matter how deep [or how fast or slow] the penetration.
If the rise in TSI was not forever, but cyclical [as it is], the signal would be even smaller.
Tom in normal Florida (07:33:05) :
I think this entire thread about being colder in some places Chicago but warmer in others is the best example of why an “average” global temperature makes no sense and and the miniscule +/- anomolies from that “average” make even less sense. Of course my livelyhood doesn’t depend on government or foundation grants.
Well, yes and no. Regionally, climate — and the weather — is much more variable than globally. Lot of averaging goes into the global numbers, so they are not going to be very representative of any given locality. But as we can see with the satellite numbers — to sidestep the UHI and quality issues with surface stations — there are global variations that it is useful to monitor and attempt to understand. So I’m okay with attempting to measure an average global temperature.
But I do wish local and regional weather were better reported as to the inherent variability in what is “normal” weather (or the relevant climatology). In the part of the country where I live, I question whether there really is such a thing as a single daily “normal” temperature. That is because our weather is normally bimodal; unless we are stuck under a high pressure system that stays in place for a while, we have fronts moving across our region once or twice a week. Temperatures are always warmer than “normal” ahead of the front, and cooler than “normal” behind it. But, say, the cooler temperatures behind the front are normal…for that climate; and the warmer temperatures ahead of the front are normal. So the reported daily normal is usually wrong.
Being statistically literate, I’d rather see “normal” reported as a range based on standard deviation (even with bimodal weather).
I think Flanagan was just shown that HE is in denial. Turnabout is fair play.
Leif Svalgaard (07:48:58)
Leif, I seem to recall that you said the crf was beginning to trend downward sometime last Fall, maybe in response to a Archibald post.
I’ve looked at your plots — and thanks for them, as it gives a broader perspective than the two I usually look at, Moscow and Oulu — and I think you’d be hard pressed to produce a downward trend in any of them without cherry picking a start date.
This is one of those things we’ll see well only after it is truly underway. Since this is an odd-even transition, the decline, once it begins, should be rather sharp and noticeable (i.e. this should be a “peaked” maximum in crf, not a “rounded” maximum). But given the unusual nature of this minimum, who really knows how this one will turn out?
Thanks, Anthony, for a stimulating subject from the mob/fraud center of the USA. No reform movements in that city ever get very far off the ground. In fact, I think that the first “noted” serial killer lived and worked in Chicago. Great discussion in the comments. I am glad that Mr. Sun is well represented. The blog is hot while most of our weather is cool.
Over one billion are now starving world wide. The number will continue to rise. Where is the reporting of this disaster? Even Oxfam have spun it as “global warming” when it’s not. This is far too serious to play politics with. The utter lack of contingency planning for even a mild cold period is a sin.
Basil (08:04:14) :
I think you’d be hard pressed to produce a downward trend in any of them without cherry picking a start date.
Nature does the picking for us in providing the time for the minimum [sometime late last fall].
this should be a “peaked” maximum in crf, not a “rounded”
The ‘peaked’ may simply be because the other minima were short. Imagine that the current minimum would stretch on for another 30 years, then clearly we would not have a peaked crf.
“vibenna (00:35:35) :
E.M. Smith: you see it as the exact centre of the Bell curve. I see as the fourth equal lowest seasonal value since 1978. Also, the lowest five seasonal values are all in the last five years. See this link at cyrosphere today for a longer history with more perspective …”
I don’t see any perspective in an argument like that. Curves are curves, not zigzags. You’d expect arctic ice to just come roaring back rather than slowly and incrementally? It’s not just the change from some distance point, some cumulative count, or some deviation from an average but the change in the change that is informative.
In 2006 the AGW hoaxters were screaming that Lake Superior, et al, were going to dry up because it had gone down for the last several years and approaching 30″, IIRC, that summer. It’s still been low since then but the change in low has gone from 30″ to 6″ as of last month.
Thank God people aren’t using your method for unemployment figures and arbitrary starting points, ’cause they’d sound like idiots predicting no one will be employed by next summer, the way they were predicting ice at the north pole would melt last summer.
Here in Saskatchewan it is unseasonably cold, 10th of July and it’s 10 degrees C this morning! Spring was three weeks late, and my tomatos are pathetic. We also had a very cold, long winter up here in western canada with many records set for extreme cold.
I know it’s weather, not climate, but it’s frickin cold weather….
http://www.canadaeast.com/front/article/529471
Record cold wind chills of -50 C recorded overnight in Saskatchewan (jan 2009)
http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/story.html?id=e25537cf-e677-4c20-a61c-8584a406604d (january 2009)
How’s this for cold comfort? Saskatoon’s deep freeze is likely the longest streak of low temperatures below -25 C that has numbed this city since record-keeping began in 1892.
2009 – Cold streak sets new record, Saskatoon experiences 24 consecutive days of -25 C (jan 2009)
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/Record+cold+temperatures+Saskatchewan/1531746/story.html (april 2009)
Record-cold temperatures in Saskatchewan
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/Technology/Saskatoon+ties+record+cold+Wednesday+records+across+province/1378589/story.html (july 2009)
Saskatoon residents dealt with a record-tying cold on Wednesday (july 2009)
Well so far, I have heard it is colder than usual in New York, LA, and Chicago. Not a good time for the Democrats to be ringing the “World is on Fire” alarm. If they can’t energize the core, what hope do they have in “fly-over” districts.
Ha ha! This is quite possibly the lamest counter-argument to Climate Change you have yet posted.
REPLY: ahh another conclusion jumper that can’t read. Note the tag “weather”, and note the disclaimer at the top.
Point out exactly where I said this is a “counter-argument to Climate Change”. I notice on your blog:
http://coloradocelt.wordpress.com/
…you teach about “faeries”, so I can see that you are very factually based in your thinking. Good luck to you. – Anthony
SusanP (22:32:53) :
“There can be 20 or even 30 degree differences within the city of LA on any given day due to valley, mountain and beach areas”
No kidding on that. My work keeps the air conditioning on so high that I am freezing by the time I get out of work. It’s still cool when I am heading home so I turn the heater in my car up half way just to get my core temp back to normal. As I top over the canyon going into the valley I have to turn the heat all the way down. Once I head west into the valley I end up running the air conditioning in my car. From cool to hot all in a 25 mile trip. It fascinates me how much the ocean side of the mountains can be so different.
I sooooo love the mild temps we have been having this year. Only been running the air the last few weeks. My electric bill would normally be running twice what it is right now. I really hope this hangs on for the rest of the summer. I doubt it but I can hope.
Cold temps do become climate records. Where do you think the temperature data came from that IPCC used? Faeries? Weather is a part of climate. Climate is what you get due to your address on Earth (think climate zone-which you can learn about in any grade school Science text). Weather variations are what you get within your climate zone. Weather changes. Most of the time weather variation has patterns to it, sometimes it is chaotic and freaky. Our best fight against AGW theory is to understand where weather variation comes from.
Another entry from the weather is not climate department, this time courtesy of Tom Skilling, WGN-TV meteorologist
This climatochronology is tricky stuff. Over at RuleClimate the rule of thumb seems to be that after 30 years, weather turns into climate. By, my back of the envelope calculations, the 118 year Windy City low does appear to meet Gavins’ longevity criteria. Please note, however, that as I’m a non-published, non-climatologist that I’m unable to tap into the rich resource offered by the Goddard Institute of Statistical Sophistry and I can only offer up raw and unprocessed data.
I had a wee look at Tom Skillings’ Facebook offering.
http://ko-kr.facebook.com/TomSkilling?v=info
This caught my attention.
Tom Skilling, WGN-TV chief meteorologist, appears weekdays on WGN Midday News, WGN Evening News and WGN News at Nine. He celebrated his 30th anniversary with WGN-TV in August 2008
Guess that makes him a climatologist. A bit like yourself Mr W?
I believe that it my be useful to use an acronym for the sacred mantra of weather is not climate. When scraping ice off of a windscreen, or when your teeth are chattering it might be useful to just use as many WINC’s as possible to conserve energy and get into the spirit of the hoax.
“Weather isn’t climate” is meant to dissuade any discussion.
Weather as part of climate is much better.
Now, how about weather as an instance of Climate, as in the Climate being a class. Each yearly instance comes with it’s own random-generated value.
If the Climate is turning to another one, the instances of that Climate will being to also turn. So, if your weather is turning year upon year into something different than what is expected the last 50 years, it might just be your first indication of the climate changing.
The changes I hear most often from worldwide is ‘getting colder’.
rbateman,
Since climate and weather are inseparable, how about: weather is a function of climate.
Another point of interest for you non Chicago natives and I’m sure this has happened in many other places. The “official” Chicago temp location has moved multiple times in it’s recorded history. The first move I believe was due to the Chicago fire ( all earlier records were lost during the fire). Temperatures taken prior to 1940 were all taken at locations in the “downtown” area within 1/2 mile of Lake Michigan , some within a couple hundred yards or at U of Chicago which is also very close to the lake. That all changed in 1940 when the “official” temps were switched to Midway Airport which is approx 6 miles from the lakeshore and completely surrounded by houses. Then the big switch came in 1980 when it was moved to O’Hare Airport which is about 12 miles from the lakeshore.
Now that doesn’t sound like a great distance but we are told everyday by Tom Skilling and the other Chicago weathermen what the expected high is for the next day and then we get “but cooler by the lake”.
In January we had a few warm days that approached record highs ( 100 year old highs ) in the 60 degree area at Ohare. The downtown temperature high was only 42 degrees ( remember that’s only about 12 miles away ) and that is where the old historical high was taken a hundred years ago. But nobody seemed to think about that fact when they were all a twitter about breaking a record high in January
From the American Heritage English Dictionary:
——————–
==Excerpted==:
.
weath·er
n.
1. The state of the atmosphere at a given time and place, with respect to variables such as temperature, moisture, wind velocity, and barometric pressure.
—–
==Excerpted==:
cli·mate
n.
1. The meteorological conditions, including temperature, precipitation, and wind, that characteristically prevail in a particular region.
2. A region of the earth having particular meteorological conditions: lives in a cold climate.
——————–
.
ERGO: Weather is NOT climate, and climate is NOT weather.
.
CLIMATE —by the definition— is the ~prevailing~ condition, predicated upon the historical and NOT the immediate, nor any portion thereof.
.
WEATHER —by the definition— is the incidental state of the atmosphere at any given moment.
.
Patrick Davis (05:54:50)
.
“Jack, are you in New Zealand? I’d give NIWA as much respect in it’s ability to do any real science as I would if I stepped in dog/cow/sheep excrement.”
.
Speaking of respect, maybe you should try to write a grammatical, coherent sentence before you bandy the word about.
Tom Skilling! Perhaps–no, certainly!– the best TV weatherman on the planet. The Universe, even. His delivery is so unique and spell-binding and just dense; I hear his careful cadence even in his prose!
Smokey (21:14:41) :
rbateman,
Since climate and weather are inseparable, how about: weather is a function of climate.
That is excellent. Another one for the climate doomsters is: climate models are not climate.
John F. Hultquist (18:09:10) :
“This seems like a good place to point out that a place’s climate is the long term pattern of the weather. Do you usually have hot/wet summers and cold/snowy winters, or perhaps mild/dry summers and cool/wet winters? World maps, and more precise regional maps, of these patterns have been available for years (see Köppen). When conceptualized in this way, is anyone claiming that the climate where they live has changed in the last fifty years?
Pamela Gray (15:45:30) :
“Cold temps do become climate records. Where do you think the temperature data came from that IPCC used? Faeries? Weather is a part of climate. Climate is what you get due to your address on Earth (think climate zone-which you can learn about in any grade school Science text). Weather variations are what you get within your climate zone. Weather changes. Most of the time weather variation has patterns to it, sometimes it is chaotic and freaky. Our best fight against AGW theory is to understand where weather variation comes from.”
Global climate is only relevant on geological time scales. Otherwise, all climate is local.
That’s my story and I’m stickin’ with it.
Speaking of weather and climate, I’ve been noticing the phrase “inclimate weather” cropping up, instead of “inclement weather”. It’s funny, and shows the degree that climate has entered the consciousness of the masses.
The lack of solar (sun spots) theory seems to fit things well, the theory is that the lack of sunspots allows more than normal cosmic rays into the solar system which forms more cloud cover on earth, which allows less heat on earth. Makes sense, and this theory was out there 8 months ago. Current solar activity lowest in decades(maybe centuries)
A good portion of the earth is quite cool, much more than normal, from the North pole to the south pole. Should reach record ice levels in the South pole this winter, so no danger of the South pole melting and raising sea levels by upto 200 feet as I have seen mentioned. At least not this year
July 2009 closes as Chicago, IL coolest in 118 years. The month closes at midnight Friday night and appears likely to finish as Chicago’s coolest July in 118 years.The average temperature of 69.4-degrees over the first 30 days is more than 4-degrees below the long term average. It becomes the first July in 139 years of records here which has failed to produce a temperature greater than 86 degrees. An 86 degree high occurred earlier this month on July 6–a reading never exceeded. US Senate, are you noticing this before voting on the CO2 Clean Air Tax, oops I mean Act?