The irony, it burns. Do you think maybe Gaia is trying to send the U.N. and the delegates a message? One record low was funny, three in a row was hilarious, a new record low for the month of December was ROFL, but now six straight days of record lows during the U.N. COP16 Global Warming conference? That’s galactically inconvenient. The whole month so far has averaged below normal:
Here’s today from Weather Underground, Today’s low was 55°F and the old record was 60°F in 1999:
And here are the other 5 days, and more record lows are forecast, see below:
======================================================
The forecast for Cancun is not encouraging:
Existing record lows for the next two days are:
Dec 11 57 °F (2003)
Dec 12 55 °F (2008)
It is likely we will see a full week, possibly 8 days of record lows, and another new all time record low for the month of December is possible also.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!
I know, off topic… but, you can’t deny the spirit.. lol
just sayin…
“That’s galactically inconvenient”.
That is indeed a good turn of phrase. Like it a lot. Nice one!
Andrew30 says:
“All the Measured Data for 2010 is not collected….”
From the article:
“Many scientists use the climate year, which runs from December of the preceding year to November of the current year, to evaluate long-term climate trends. The combined land-ocean temperature readings NASA’s Goddard Institute posted Friday indicate that 2010 has surpassed what it identified as the previous warmest climate year, 2005. The findings are significant, according to experts, and barring some temperature anomaly in December, should place 2010 as the warmest year on record overall.”
Don’t think some cold days in Cancun are going to change the conclusion.
Mike D. says:
December 10, 2010 at 10:36 am
R. Gates says: Are they related to AGW warming? Possibly. Cold air in areas not used to it is NOT a sign that AGW is not happening…
Thank you. Of course it’s colder because it’s warmer. That’s perfectly gore-ical. Or is the proper terminology gore-ish? Whatever, it fits like O.J.’s glove
__________
Mike, fortunately you’re simplistic way of looking at the effects of a 40% rise in CO2 is not followed by the thousands of scientists studying this around the world. When you disrupt climate patterns you’re going to see new extremes– especially in the hyrdological cycle.
I notice Richard Black didn’t mention the record low temps in his BBC piece here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11961378
Amidst all the fun – release of tension perhaps? – I’m pleased to see that R Gates is being taken seriously by some commenters.
R Gates, while I don’t think your analysis is right, I do agree that we should keep our attention on the bigger climate picture even while diverting into local weather for some fun. But when you say “I think some AGW skeptics should get beyond a simple linear way of thinking of the effects that the 40% increase in CO2 could be having on global weather patterns.. One thing that must happen though, if AGW happening is …“, the problem is that this way of thinking can and must cut both ways. So, for example : AGW warmists should get beyond a simple linear way of thinking that global weather patterns can all be explained by the 40% increase in CO2. One thing that must happen though, if AGW is happening, is that the tropical troposphere (where in theory AGW actually begins) must warm more than the surface.
Re your reference to the hydrological cycle. Your point may well be valid, but if such changes do occur it is necessary also to eliminate the possibility that they could be from natural causes. After all, the “hydrological cycle” is a cycle.
If we openly examine all the available evidence, maybe we can make progress.
Tenuc says:
December 10, 2010 at 11:34 am
R. Gates says:
December 10, 2010 at 9:21 am
What’s more inconvenient is the causes behind the cool weather in Cancun. High pressure over the Arctic has once more (like last winter) opened up a pipeline of cold air to the south. At the same time we are seeing record lows in Cancun, we’ve been seeing record warmth is areas of the north like Greenland. Are these related? Probably. Are they related to AGW warming? Possibly. Cold air in areas not used to it is NOT a sign that AGW is not happening…far from it. I think some AGW skeptics should get beyond a simple linear way of thinking of the effects that the 40% increase in CO2 could be having on global weather patterns. One thing that must happen though, if AGW happening is an acceleration of the hydrological cycle. Look for extreme floods, rains, snowfalls, etc.
Asi is usual for a true believer of the CAGW myth, you have got your logic twisted round to suit your doctrine.
Yes, when the planet warms through its normal oscillating cycle of cool, warm, cool…e.t.c, this increases the rate of energy disipation of the hydrological cycle.
This prevents further heating by sending more warmth to the poles where it is lost to space and eventuality this cooling slows down the hydrological heat engine again, which starts warming once more.
______
The acceleration of the hydrological cycle is a long term response of the planet to an increase in CO2, and seems to be the natural way the planet trys to balance the level of CO2. This process naturally occurs over millions of years through the weathering of rock (which reduces CO2). However, this natural feedback mechanism works when CO2 rises relatively slowly. The geologically speaking rapid rise in CO2 since the 1700’s is new territory for the hydrological cycle. The core question is how the earth will respond to what represent a virtually instant 40% jump in CO2 levels. We know the hyrdological cycle will accelerate, but since this feedback will not reduce the source of the rapid rise in CO2 (i.e. human activity), at least not immediately, a question of sensitivty and chaotic effects becomes quite important.
It is interesting to note on the graph that the minimum temperature is very close to the sunset dew point in most cases. This is, in fact, a very good way to forecast the overnight low if skies are clear and there is no wind. A bit OT but quite a while back I was developing a method/model to predict low temperatures. This becomes especially important when the low is around zero in the growing season. I developed a model based on black body radiation and then modified for cloud cover, wind, and relative humidity. I worked for quite a while developing this model. I then decided to compare it to using the straight old dew point at sunset as the overnight low under clear and calm conditions. Well…the simple dew point method generally worked a lot better. So it goes to show you that the more complicated method is not always the best, even though it may be based on what you believe to be more sound physics.
It is also often difficult to admit that the model you worked so long on is really not that good. I believe that this is where a lot of climate modelers have a problem. Even though they may know the model has serious failings, it is hard to admit that after you put so much work into it. And in a way I can sympathize with them on this issue. But that does not excuse them from portraying their model as more that it really is.
Well, since you are all starting to talk about what will, and will not, happen with the hydrological cycle; how about some data?
I found this site that makes nice little plots of the temperatures vs the precipitation. Throughout all of history (with minor excursions and trivial variations in lead / lag) the temps and precip pretty much track. Until you get to GISS data…
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/12/10/does-rain-call-giss-liars/
But I’m sure R. Gates will find some way to show that CO2 caused more rain / temp ratio in the early 1900’s and far less in the late 1900’s… It’s magic, after all … 😉
R. Gates says:
Same old tired crap, missy. Well we’ve been looking for those for 20 years now, and weather has not strayed outside of norms. There’s no increase in extreme floods, rains, snowfalls, etc. Under normal circumstances people would admit their conjecture is not happening.
GISS Nov 10 0.73
If this was not such a serious matter I would laught.
@ur momisugly Mark Bowlin:
Gore effect chronology:
http://www.climatedepot.com/a/1869/Climate-Depot-Factsheet-on-the-Gore-Effect-Phenomenon
Mark Bowlin wanted a Gore Effect list – from the posts on this page
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/09/gore-effect-strikes-again-new-coldest-ever-december-record-temperature-in-cancun/#more-29153
you will find this
There once was a man named Al Gore
who foretold what the world had in store.
But when he warned of heat,
he was buried in sleet
like he never had seen it before.
There once was a boss named Ki-Moon
who assembled his flock in Cancun
for some money to spend,
but it came to an end,
for some sheep turned to wolves all too soon.
with thanks to the Russians.
There once was a Stoltenberg, who
were to lead all his climate change crew.
But this climate change pope
seemed to lose all his hope
as no country would sign: I O U.
Jeff says: December 10, 2010 at 12:48 pm
“Many scientists use the climate year..”
Since when?
—
http://gcmd.nasa.gov
Global temperature database: 500 stations. Measurements since 1720
Temporal Coverage
Start Date: 1720-01-01
—
Should the start date be 1719-12-01 OR 1719-11-01?
How many is “Many scientists”, 2, 5, 10?
“Many scientists use the climate year”
In keeping with the NASA mandate to support other cultures they have tried to accommodate the Arabic (Hijri) calendar. So they dug up an obscure definition of ‘a year’ that came closest to last day of the last Hijri year (30th of dhul-Higiha, 1431) aka (Tuesday 7 December 2010).
If the temperature record had been different they would have used the Australian school year as a base. If it is convenient (i.e. warmer) in 2012 they may use the Mayan calendar from that point forward so that they can say that the year was the warmest that could ever possibly be recorded, since the calendar ends in 2012.
“Don’t think some cold days in Cancun are going to change the conclusion.”
Don’t think some cold days in Cancun are going to change the foregone conclusion.
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/KeywordSearch/Metadata.do?Portal=GCMD&KeywordPath=Parameters%7CCLIMATE+INDICATORS%7CAIR+TEMPERATURE+INDICES%7CCOMMON+SENSE+CLIMATE+INDEX&OrigMetadataNode=GCMD&EntryId=Rimfrost&MetadataView=Full&MetadataType=0&lbnode=mdlb3
There once was one Anthony Watts
who made up one of Earth’s hottest spots
where the heat was turned on
with each new climate con
on which skeptics all fired their shots.
Think globally.
“NASA: Hottest November on record, 2010 likely hottest year on record globally — despite deepest solar minimum in a century”, from your friends:
http://climateprogress.org/2010/12/10/nasa-hottest-year-on-record-deepest-solar-minimum/
(I know many of you don’t like C.P. but it is good to read the other side on occasion – I do.)
Colin from Mission;
Thorougly enjoyed the “light up, Francis” comment. Well done.
There once was a Kyoto deal
which so many thought was there for real.
Like a bolt out of blue
it expired its due.
By its grave, all the warmers will kneel.
There once was a Gates on this blog
who mistook NASA’s temperature log.
For its large weather range
did not mean Climate Change,
even though it kept Gates in a fog.
[reply] Excellent! Keep ’em coming Geir ~tallmod
There is a Tim Gore from Oxfam who is presently in Cancun. No relation I suppose…………………….. :o)
Andy, you’re struggling, but that’s okay. We can reconvene on Dec. 31, 2010 and see if the data and scientific findings have changed.
R. Gates says:
December 10, 2010 at 9:21 am
One thing that must happen though, if AGW happening is an acceleration of the hydrological cycle. Look for extreme floods, rains, snowfalls, etc.
==================================================
Do you really think that’s happening right now Gates?
Do you really think our planet is that unstable?
That this little bitty rise in CO2 is really doing that?