More from the “weather is not climate” department. While our economy cools, so do apparently our cities. Cincinnati has a similar problem, and does Traverse City, and the cool weather doesn’t “play in Peoria“.
Taken by themselves it doesn’t mean much, but it is interesting.
NOUS41 KOKX 240847
PNSOKX
CTZ005>012-NJZ002>006-011-NYZ067>081-251000-
PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW YORK NY
444 AM EDT FRI JUL 24 2009
…UNUSUALLY COOL JULY FOR CENTRAL PARK…
FOR SOME PERSPECTIVE…HERE ARE THE TOP TEN COOLEST JULYS ON RECORD
SINCE 1869 FOR CENTRAL PARK IN NEW YORK CITY:
COOLEST
AVG. TEMP. YEAR
70.7 1888
71.9 1884
72.1 1914
72.3 2000/1871
72.4 1891
72.6 1895
72.8 1902/1869
72.9 1956
73.1 1890
73.2 2001
DUE TO THE UNUSUALLY COOL CONDITIONS THUS FAR IN JULY…HERE ARE
SOME INTERESTING FACTS TO NOTE…
WITH AN AVERAGE DAILY TEMPERATURE OF 71.6…CURRENTLY RUNNING 4.7
DEGREES BELOW NORMAL…THIS JULY IS ON TRACK FOR THE 2ND COOLEST
ON RECORD. BELOW AVERAGE TEMPERATURES HAVE OCCURRED ON 21 OUT OF
23 DAYS…WITH THE OTHER TWO DAYS BEING NORMAL. THERE HAVE BEEN
ZERO ABOVE NORMAL DAYS.
CENTRAL PARK HAS ONLY REACHED 85 DEGREES ONCE THIS MONTH…ON THE
17TH…AND HAS NOT YET REACHED 90 DEGREES THIS SUMMER. IF THIS
CONTINUES THROUGH THE END OF THE MONTH…IT WILL ONLY BE THE
SECOND TIME SINCE 1869 THAT 90 DEGREES WAS NOT REACHED IN JUNE OR
JULY. THE ONLY OTHER TIME THIS OCCURRED WAS 1996.
$$
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Nogw (15:49:08) :
“This the most stupid conspiracy ever concocted, perhaps based on the fact that a lot of people in the “first and developed world” are by far more ignorants than the third world poor people.”
As Dick Lindzen said on radio recently:
“Ordinary people see through this but educated people are very vulnerable.”
(on WRKO Boston)
Allan M (02:52:28) :
As Dick Lindzen said on radio recently:
“Ordinary people see through this but educated people are very vulnerable.”
One of my quotes of the week.
Phil wrote:
“Yes, but globally, this month is a scorcher
– and the arctic ice is disappearing quickly – nearing 2007 levels…”
Mike Bryant replied:
“You seem to equate average earth temps with greater than average Arctic melt, while the Arctic is cooler than average…. ”
However, the picture ‘Sea Ice Extent’ does show that the extent of arctic ice is indeed nearing 2007 levels, as Phil wrote.
-Jean
Since the Arctic is cooler than normal, Sea Ice extent is probably more driven by wind, as NASA has stated, than temperatures… You’re following a dead end, my friend…
I hope the third time is a charm and not a diaster.
“>linked text
Douglas H. Wood (22:57:02) :
“I wish you well at the Nashville meeting.”
Thank you.
For any who are interested, below is a link to the presentations on Climate Change Legislation, where I will present my paper. They are giving this cowboy from Texas, now living in California, a microphone and media presentation system, then allowing me to hold forth for 30 minutes on the idiocy in California known as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. I’m batting clean-up, and very much looking forward to this. I will also participate in the Panel Discussion immediately following.
http://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2009/webprogram/Session10396.html
from AccuWeather
3,000 Low Temp Records Set This July!
http://www.accuweather.com/mt-news-blogs.asp?blog=weathermatrix&partner=&pgUrl=/mtweb/content/weathermatrix/archives/2009/07/1000_low_temp_records_set_this_july.asp
The thing Douglas H. Wood, is that the neither the weather nor the climate has been corrupted! The exact, give or take 0,1 degree Celcius, change was predicted back in 1920’s and is to be read about in a science essay from 1931 written by a Swedish geologist, a Swedish Meterologist and a Swedish Oceanographer!!! But of course it was predicted to have reach today’s levels in 1995 🙂
The thing Douglas H. Wood, is that my father, died last year, was one of this world’s first persons working with environmental questions (officially from 1954 but partly from 1935/36) and that I participated in survey measuring temperatures in water and air as well as measuring chemical and biologic factors from 1957 to 1971, after that I had moved to Gothenburg I didn’t participate on regular basis but I had access to all information and I still have but now from other persons. Real specialists.
What we do have, and that’s the only problem but a hugh problem that IF the politicians took that to their heart would cost approximate a quadruple of the some now spent on the so called scholars and their suggested needs of change etc. That problem is pollution in air and water which here and now, in real time not in an imaginary supposed future 50 to 200 years from now, directly cause deaths and damage on male reproductive organs. Not only humans but together with mercury enrichment up the lines from ‘krill’ to Ice Bear causes changes that’s that some now tries to make believe they are due to Climate Change, no matter that the real scientists in this questions, the old ones who had read and experienced more than any of the so called scholars of today, knew of this from 1971 on forward. Chemistry industry was well aware in 1970’s of the effects of many chemical substances passing into rivers, lakes and sea in many differrent ways.
So please don’t try that attitude of yours towards me. I participated in media and political debates in this type of questions back in mid 70’s and while I am disabled I still can read and use Theories of Science on so called Hypothesis using an unproven assumption as a true fact in order to prove their thesis!
Ask anybody from NYC … NYC is the world
Well, it is “The City”.
There wont be any possible predictions in close future because of the increase of heat out of contorl. I believe that we will contunie to see such diffrent climate changings in a while
Good luck, Roger…
tho I know you don’t need it…
Mike… fellow Texan
I can tell it has been cooler here in New York this month. It is strange though, because in the winter, we no longer get big snowstorms like we did in the 1970s and 1980s. Seems the summers are getting cooler and the winters are getting warmer.
The 10-day forecast, starting from today (7/27/09) shows that today’s temp has the closest chance of reaching 90 (88 is the predicted high).
If it doesn’t happen today, it looks like it won’t happen for the remainder of the month (predicted highs are only in mid-80’s).
Mike Bryant,
Thanks.
“I have NEVER EVER said global warming is not happening”
What a strange claim. So what did you mean, on 2 March this year, when you said “It appears that global cooling recognition may be starting to make headway in the scientific community”? What about on 15 August 2008 when you said “Hadley Climate Center HadAT2 Data shows global cooling”? 20 July 2008: “Shifting of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation from its warm mode to cool mode assures global cooling for the next three decades”? 12 July 2008: “Four scientists: Global Warming Out, Global Cooling In”?
And by the way, if you prefer people not to comment on what you write, then why publish a blog?
REPLY: For the record. The last 100 years is what I’m referring to. The global temperature trend has been positive for the last 100 years, no dispute there and I never have disputed it. However for the last few years, the trend has not maintained itself, and yes for recent times the trend has shown a cooling. If you want to take that and spin it into “Watts denies global warming” then you’d of course be wrong.
I’m happy to have real people comment on what I write, in fact I have 150,000 comments on this blog thus far, more than any other, so puhleeze, don’t lecture me about commentary. But you are just another anonymous coward, and RW it is clear what your intent is. – Anthony
Why the cool summer?
http://www.fox8.com/wjw-scott-sabol-weather-column7,0,4905013.story
Greenpeace flees ice masses:
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2009/07/midsummer-farce-in-arctic-greenpeace.html
Anthony: “However for the last few years, the trend has not maintained itself, and yes for recent times the trend has shown a cooling”. This is utterly untrue. Surely you must know that not every wiggle in the temperature record is a “trend”? You can only talk about a trend if it’s statistically significant. There is no statistically significant cooling trend, and there has not been for several decades. The last decade has been the warmest in the instrumental record, and the rate of warming is increasing. Choose a sensible value of X, and calculate the trend from X-1998, and then X-2008. You’ll find that the latter is larger.
How am I any more or less anonymous than anyone else? And just what is my intent?