Arctic temperature is still not above 0°C – the latest date in fifty years of record keeping

Heads up to all on WUWT!!!!!
The Climate denial crock of the week is announcing a new video that “promises to disprove/discredit the negative cloud feedback theory” they say it will be a few weeks before it gets posted.
Will there be a rebuttal to this?

OT, but Gavin Schmidt is a ‘skeptic’????
This is from Fox News:
Global Warming May Be Slowing America’s Winds
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Print ShareThisWASHINGTON — The wind, a favorite power source of the green energy movement, seems to be dying down across the United States.
And the cause, ironically, may be global warming — the very problem wind power seeks to address.
The idea that winds may be slowing is still a speculative one, and scientists disagree whether that is happening.
But a first-of-its-kind study suggests that average and peak wind speeds have been noticeably slowing since 1973, especially in the Midwest and the East.
“It’s a very large effect,” said study co-author Eugene Takle, a professor of atmospheric science at Iowa State University.
• Click here to visit FOXNews.com’s Natural Science Center.
In some places in the Midwest, the trend shows a 10 percent drop or more over a decade. That adds up when the average wind speed in the region is about 10 to 12 miles per hour.
There’s been a jump in the number of low or no wind days in the Midwest, said the study’s lead author, Sara Pryor, an atmospheric scientist at Indiana University.
Wind measurements plotted out on U.S. maps by Pryor show wind speeds falling mostly along and east of the Mississippi River.
Some areas that are banking on wind power, such as west Texas and parts of the Northern Plains, do not show winds slowing nearly as much.
Yet, states such as Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Kansas, Virginia, Louisiana, Georgia, northern Maine and western Montana show some of the biggest drop in wind speeds.
“The stations bordering the Great Lakes do seem to have experienced the greatest changes,” Pryor said Tuesday.
That’s probably because there’s less ice on the lakes and wind speeds faster across ice than it does over water, she said.
Still, the study, which will be published in August in the peer-reviewed Journal of Geophysical Research, is preliminary.
Related StoriesMeasuring Cow Burps in Fight Against Climate Change
U.N.: Nature Best at Handling Climate Change
Don’t Play Guilt Card, Environmentalists Told
There are enough questions that even the authors say it’s too early to know if this is a real trend or not. But it raises a new side effect of global warming that hasn’t been looked into before.
The ambiguity of the results is due to changes in wind-measuring instruments over the years, according to Pryor. And while actual measurements found diminished winds, some climate computer models — which are not direct observations — did not, she said.
Yet, a couple of earlier studies also found wind reductions in Australia and Europe, offering more comfort that the U.S. findings are real, Pryor and Takle said.
It also makes sense based on how weather and climate work, Takle said.
In global warming, the poles warm more and faster than the rest of the globe, and temperature records, especially in the Arctic, show this.
That means the temperature difference between the poles and the equator shrinks and with it the difference in air pressure in the two regions.
Differences in barometric pressure are a main driver in strong winds. Lower pressure difference means less wind.
Even so, that information doesn’t provide the definitive proof that science requires to connect reduced wind speeds to global warming, the authors said.
In climate change science, there is a rigorous and specific method — which looks at all possible causes and charts their specific effects — to attribute an effect to global warming. That should be done eventually with wind, scientists say.
Jeff Freedman, an atmospheric scientist with AWS Truewind, an Albany, N.Y., renewable energy consulting firm, has studied the same topic, but hasn’t published in a scientific journal yet. He said his research has found no definitive trend of reduced surface wind speed.
One of the problems Pryor acknowledges with her study is that over many years, changing conditions near wind-measuring devices can skew data. If trees grow or buildings are erected near wind gauges, that could reduce speed measurements.
Several outside experts mostly agree that there are signs that wind speed is decreasing and that global warming is the likely culprit.
The new study “demonstrates, rather conclusively in my mind, that average and peak wind speeds have decreased over the U.S. in recent decades,” said Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University.
” A naysayer is Gavin Schmidt, a NASA climate scientist in New York who said the results conflict with climate models that show no effect from global warming”.
He also doubts that any decline in the winds that might be occurring has much of an effect on wind power.
But another expert, Jonathan Miles, of James Madison University, said a 10 percent reduction in wind speeds over a decade “would have an enormous effect on power production.”
Pryor said a 10 percent change in peak winds would translate into a 30 percent change in how much energy is reaped.
But because the research is in such early stages, she said, “at this point it would be premature to modify wind energy development plans.”
Robert Gramlich, policy director at the American Wind Energy Association, said the idea of reduced winds was new to him. He wants to see verification from other studies before he worries too much about it.

Your URL does not want to post on Facebook. It seems that the URL
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/25/arctic-temperature-is-still-not-above-0%C2%B0c-the-latest-date-in-fifty-years-of-record-keeping%E2%80%A6%E2%80%9D/
is not nicely formatted for the Facebook script.
In the future, could you avoid weird character such as the degree symbol, and ellipsis and quote marks?
It must be those funky characters that screws up the script.
REPLY: I have no control over this, WordPress.com does this. But you can use TinyURL to convert the long string into a short one, then post the new smaller URL it makes. Try it, http://tinyurl.com/ – Anthony

Flanagan said, “Melting is mainly due to contact with “hot” water, not melting from the top. When ice melts, energy is pumped in the environment (i.e. the process is endothermic) which tends to cool the surrounding atmosphere. ”
It sounds like he is claiming there is some sort of thermal pump that transfers energy from the atmosphere into the ice. This “cool(s) the surrounding atmosphere” but melts the ice from below. Because … the “hot” water is somehow the energy behind the pump.
Hunh ???
I don’t see how anyone of those who agree “in principle” with him can possibly design a natural physical system that does that. It violates the second law of thermodynamics in several different ways.
C’mon guys, try a little harder.

All the evidence you need is when the liberals changed Global Warming to Climate Change. Why would you do that? Global Warming is more scary and fear mongering then CC.
Keep bring up the facts because these Political Scientists can’t dispute facts even though they ignore them.

I went to the link that CPT. Charles provided regarding the missing spring in the eastern Arctic. Birds are not able to reproduce because of the COLD.
Deep in the article I found this quote. It sent CHILLS up my spine:
“According to NOAA scientists, although the Arctic is warming, more frequent annual oscillations in temperature are likely to occur, often resulting in late springs.
“Such major oscillations are part of a bumpy ride toward global warming,” said Thomas Karl of the National Climate Center. “For awhile at least this will be the shape of things to come.”
Huh?!
OMG.

Can someone explain what happened in the beginning of the year?
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php What does that jagged red line above the green one mean 🙂

I would expect that, even with the present surface air cooling, sea ice extent will continue to be below “normal” for the next few years, due to the massive thermal inertia of the oceans. Depending on how one interprets the data, the peak “plateau” of global temperatures occured from 1998-2007, a span of 9 years. The sea ice extent didn’t start to really noticably decline until 2005, continuing to stay below normal up to the present. So if in my overly-simplistic way, we deduce there is a 7 year delay between global air temperatures and arctic sea ice extent, we won’t be back “in the black” with regards to sea ice until 2014.

From the Dannish website: http://ocean.dmi.dk/satellite/index.uk.php
why is Norton sound in Alaska 14 deg C, much warmer than anywhere else?

wws: here’s the link to the data I’m referring to
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/plot.csv
I think things cannot be clearer than that.
About the post title: I think it is misleading. Many people here clearly think it means 273 K hasn’t been reached yet this year. The expression “is still not above 0”, in my sense, means that it hasn’t done it, not that it did but isn’t anymore. Moreover, in 2006 it hit 0 even later. 1992 was even worse.