Temperatures dropped to a record low in Prince Edward Island overnight Tuesday, with reports of frost throughout the province.
An official record low of 3.8 C was set early Wednesday morning at Charlottetown airport.
The previous record for that date was 5.1 C, set in 2005.
Bob Robichaud, a meteorologist with Environment Canada, said that to his knowledge, frost has never been reported before in July in P.E.I.
“That 3.8 we got last night kind of sticks out as being lower than some of the other records for anytime in early July,” Robichaud told CBC News on Wednesday.
“So we’re looking at a significant event,” he said.
Environment Canada has issued a frost risk warning in low-lying areas of the province for Wednesday night. The temperature is expected to dip to 4 C.
The forecast for Thursday, however, calls for sunny skies and a temperature of 22 C for the province.
rbateman (22:34:46) :
The link to the Baranyi / Ludmany/ Coffey report:
http://fenyi.sci.klte.hu/publ/Baranyi_et_al1998.pdf
BARANYI,T., LUDMÁNY,A., Coffey,H. 1998, 22 year solar modulation of Earth’s northern hemisphere temperatures, Geophys. Res. Lett. 25, 2269-2272
Very interesting. The key sentence for me is this:
“The border separating the two regimes lies close to the meridian crossing the magnetic pole.”
The magnetic pole wanders around quite a lot over time. I wonder what effect the border being predominantly over ocean or land has on climate.
Frost? Well come on now, we all know cooling is just weather and heating is catastrophic global warming. :p lol!
Peter (20:53:41) “A bit OT, Can anyone point me to the correct place to obtain timeseries data for Canadian surface temperatures?”
http://www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/climateData/canada_e.html
“I recommend to our glorious leaders that we stop turning food into fuel for a few years and generate some surplus grain just in case.”
I wouldn’t agree with that. In modern history, food hast never been produced to increase stocks, because that would have simply devastated the producer prices.
Also, almost all corn and sugar for ethanol has been produced on additional land without competing or hurting the agricultural use.
Thirdly, the corn now grown for ethanol can exactly been regarded as a food reserve, because in case of a food shortage it could be redirected to the food chain.
Adam from Kansas: Thanks for the link.
You wrote, “Bob Tisdale reported June SST’s have the 4th highest peak in the entire dataset after 1998, 2003, and 2006…”
Actually, I don’t do stats. But since you attributed them to me, let me clarify a few things. After 1997/98, the global SST anomaly readings (OI.v2) that were higher than last month’s were in August 2005 at 0.297 deg C and October 2003 at 0.298 deg C, compared to June 2009 at 0.287 deg C. June 1998 was the warmest June on record, with June 2009 coming in second. And since GISS uses OI.v2 SST anomaly data for GISTEMP, expect near record June temps from them.
April 09 was the hottest in austria almost ever recorded, but
during the LIA the April 1800 was 2,0°C hotter than 09.
So we see, that weather creates significant temperatures all the time an all over the planet and it does not matter, if the global average is 14 or 16°C.
The remarks were:
———————-
Philip_B (21:15:31) :
Warmer sea surface temperatures mean the Earth’s climate is cooling.
Simplistically you can think of the Earth’s climate as a process of heat gain and retention by the oceans due high humidity greenhouse effect, then release to the atmosphere, transfer by weather over land and to high latitudes, where it is radiated out into space.
———————–
Begging your pardon here, but: The so-called ‘greenhouse’ effect is complete fiction.
.
First: Water does NOT ‘store’ heat, and neither does any other substance known to man. Rather what ~does~ happen is that the substance heats to maximum level of whatever external source of energy imparts to it.
.
Second: When the substance can no longer accept any additional imparted energy, that substance changes it physical character, i.e., boils or breaks down into something else, releasing energy in the process.
.
Third: Since the oceans —or any other body of water— do not ‘store’ heat, but instead release energy once the external source is removed, any external body (air for instance) adjacent will commence to absorb that released energy, and itself release energy in like fashion upon saturation of imparted energy.
.
IN NO CASE does the atmosphere of the Earth act as a so-called ‘greenhouse’ inasmuch that once the Sun’s energy ceases impinging upon the atmosphere and surface, there is no longer a SOURCE of energy to sustain any such effect.
.
Since greenhouses are in fact sustained by internal heating elements which produce heat in the absence of Sun light, then whole theory is but a contrived bit nonsense.
.
If there is to be ~any~ heating of the water after the Sun sets, it would have to be entirely geothermal in nature. And any thought of human-generated heat having even the slightest effect is yet another bit fanciful thinking.
.
If the activities of Man are supposed to impart heat in any significant quantity, then whole sections of each of the continents would have to be glowing cherry red nightly.
.
Neither bodies of water nor the atmosphere =sustain= the residual heat from either, and any thought that they might is a complete breach of KNOWN thermodynamic principles and the conservation of energy law: Once a source of thermal energy is removed, the affect body releases its excess energy at a calculable rate.
.
Finally, while it ~might~ be remarked that the air above a body of water acts as a layer of insulation, in no case of that —regardless of the constituent gasses— does that have anything to do any degree of warming, inasmuch that the energy is constantly decreasing to towards equilibrium.
.
Finally, if CO2 is such a dandy retainer of heat, then why pray tell, is Mars so bloody cold?
.
tallbloke (01:00:22) :
Just to add to my post at 00:30:01
We might be able to get some idea of how long the retained heat in the oceans will buffer falling temperatures at times of low solar activity. The two low cycles of the Dalton minimum saw a drop of around 0.7C from 1795-1820 in the Central England Temperature series
No it didn’t. From 1795 the CET trend didn’t go negative until ~1812 and that was only due to increased volcanic activity. The fall between 1795 and 1820 was ~0.3 deg. Four of the last 6 years in the DM were all warmer than 1795.
Finally, while it ~might~ be remarked that the air above a body of water acts as a layer of insulation, in no case of that —regardless of the constituent gasses— does that have anything to do any degree of warming, inasmuch that the energy is constantly decreasing to towards equilibrium
Correct, but I think Philip was referring heat gain from an external source, he thinks greenhouse, I think sun, and the rate of decrease to equilibrium is the point at issue. A lot of the heat emitted by the ocean (which has a vastly higher heat capacity than the atmosphere) warms the moist air immediately above it. While a lot of that heat convects, the atmosphere does make an effective insulating blanket, and so the timescale over which extra heat in the ocean gained from several decades of heightened solar activity dissipates can be quite large.
John Finn. I stand corrected, I’d forgotten the volcanic dimension, and had only eyeballed this graph. http://cadenzapress.co.uk/download/beck_mencken_hadley.jpg
Still looks like more than 0.3Cto me though, are you referring to a smoothed figure?
Pamela Gray (19:15:13), E.M.Smith (21:48:33), & James F. Evans (22:41:58)
“[…] loopy jet stream […]”
This seems related to the Russian classification system described here:
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/005/Y2787E/y2787e03.htm
…which is part of this:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/Y2787E/y2787e00.HTM
I never finished looking into this, but I did dig up some other info here:
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/Y5028E/Y5028E00.HTM
…in the Introduction:
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/006/y5028e/y5028e01.pdf
I’d be very curious to hear if anything in these links looks consistent with the “loopy jet stream” ideas.
Finally, if CO2 is such a dandy retainer of heat, then why pray tell, is Mars so bloody cold?
I have often wondered this myself Highlander.
Has anyone calculated the absolute amount of CO2 in the Martian atmosphere as compared to Earth’s?
A simple explanation of the radiative transfer properties of CO2 would be handy, too.
Manfred (02:20:37) :
Thirdly, the corn now grown for ethanol can exactly been regarded as a food reserve, because in case of a food shortage it could be redirected to the food chain.
But only if it has survived a devastating crop failure that normal agricultural production has suffered.
Where are the grain silos? The Egyptians learned the hard way a couple of thousand years ago, and started keeping a surplus in store in case of multiyear drought.
Someone once said no country is more than three meals away from a revolution.
It wouldn’t be pretty.
I wonder if the chilly weather on Prince Edward Island will be noticed on Prince Charles’ Planet?
James F. Evans (22:41:58) : “Strong jet streams generally result in stable high pressure domes in the middle of the continental United States and with those high pressure domes — high temperatures. ”
It is my understanding that the jet stream is the result of clashing air masses. Therefore, the strong jet stream is the result of stable high pressure domes not the cause.
Anthony:
http://fenyi.sci.klte.hu/publ/Praga2002.pdf
a sequel to the Baranyi et al of ’98
This was common across Canada. July 1st many people lost their gardens just North of me (1/2 hour). I’m close to a large river, urban center and industrial facilities so I’m moderated somewhat.
Heck, I guess with a 2 degree limit on warming we can start building more Coal Fired Plants 😀 By the time we get anywhere we’ll be in the next glaciation in this ice age.
John Finn (02:43:31) :
And you learned nothing. The crops rotted in the fields. The only thing that save Europe & England in those years was imports of grain.Trends won’t save you if there isn’t another source. Statistics tell you nothing about the wild swings behind the lazy line of trends. They tell you nothing about the change in patterns that lead to crop losses.
A trend is not data. Events are. Increased volcanic activity due to what? Why in the Dalton?
Magic Wands do not erase Events, and one Event does not erase the previous one except in Reservoirs…provided the thing didn’t go dry first.
However, Armagh record is on the bottom since its start in 1796. To see how the temperature reacts on long-term sun minimum, see the CET record starting at 1659 (during the Maunder minimum); temperatures decreased gradually and lost almost 2 deg C within some 35 years. They restored quickly with the next stronger sun cycle.
http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/CETvsArmagh_long.html
Here I connected CET with Armagh where the temperatures overlapped, but using the Armagh record from the 1796, there would be deep gap in temperatures during the Dalton minimum.
http://blog.sme.sk/blog/560/195013/armaghcetssn.jpg
The sun footprint is clearly visible in the SSN/temp record, and also the heat-retaining capacity of the Earth.
A frost such as this is caused by global warming.
Only Algore, James Hansen, Phil and a few others are able to understand the complexity of global warming.
Mere simple mortals think this means the world is cooling.
I don’t know, but I was watching the Red Sox on TV last night, and the mgr and guys in the dugout were wearing jackets in mid July. This has been, so far, “The year without much of a summer”. Who coulda predicted this? That’s right, it was predicted years ago by those crazy talkin’ sun spot flakes. Who didn’t predict this? That’s right, those sober, accuracy above all else, pure scientific, no politics, UN committee members.
Does this prove the sunspot guys right? I don’t know. But it is evidence in their favor that anyone can clearly see.
Being a simple minded engineering type, incapable of grasping the nuanced principles of AGW, could someone explain to me which of the following applies to the mystical property of “stored heat?”
• Zeroth law of thermodynamics, about thermal equilibrium:
If two thermodynamic systems are separately in thermal equilibrium with a third, they are also in thermal equilibrium with each other.
• First law of thermodynamics, about the conservation of energy:
The change in the internal energy of a closed thermodynamic system is equal to the sum of the amount of heat energy supplied to or removed from the system and the work done on or by the system.
• Second law of thermodynamics, about entropy:
The total entropy of any isolated thermodynamic system tends to increase over time, approaching a maximum value.
• Third law of thermodynamics, about the absolute zero of temperature:
As a system asymptotically approaches absolute zero of temperature all processes virtually cease and the entropy of the system asymptotically approaches a minimum value; also stated as: “the entropy of all systems and of all states of a system is zero at absolute zero” or equivalently “it is impossible to reach the absolute zero of temperature by any finite number of processes”.
• Onsager reciprocal relations:
In connected thermodynamic systems which are in equilibrium neither for pressure nor temperature, heat flow between is caused by forces proportional with unit of pressure difference, and equal to the proportional density flow caused per unit of temperature difference.
We have many charts depicting temp patterns. Where do we take some recent and more popular forcasts by warmists and compare the variaance between their forecast and actual? From this we obtain a variance percentage which we can apply to their 2050 and 2100 forecasts. Give them back a hockey stick that shows their exageration. By 2100 their exageration may be 8 degrees.
rbateman and Juraj V,
my thanks to you both for your relevant comments and links/graphs, they are very helpful to my understanding.
If it helps inform the debate, here is a graph i have made of the cumulative running total of sunspot numbers from 1750 to 2009
http://s630.photobucket.com/albums/uu21/stroller-2009/?action=view¤t=ssn-cumulative.jpg
TJA, the lower temps were predicted when the PDO flipped to cold and we had La Nina conditions. Anyone can clearly see that. And the mechanism is there. Land temps correlate highly to sea surface temps and oscillation conditions WAAAYYY more than to sun spots. If you try to find a match between the day’s sun spots and the sea surface temps you would be searching for a LOOOONNGG time. The occasional match is wriggle matching without mechanism (like watching a clock for 24 hrs to find a match between noon and your need for food-you will occasionally find a match). Follow what the oceans are doing. If you really want to follow the path, then follow the trade winds as well. Use this link and scroll down to Expert Discussions and Predictions. It is updated weekly.
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/enso.shtml#current
Adam,
I’m not sure what dates you looked at for the record lows, but from July 1st-July 7th, I added up only 48 record lows, while record highs showed but when I clicked on your link, it showed your huge number.
That being said, our data input is the same so why is it that your data has such a huge number and mine doesn’t. This is the link to my request:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/records/index.php?ts=daily&elem=mint&month=7&day=0&year=2009&submitted=Get+Records