From: NewsOK.com
The coldest temperature ever recorded in Oklahoma was set today.
The Oklahoma Mesonet weather station at Nowata reached minus 31 degrees Fahrenheit actual temperature at 7:40 a.m. today. That will be considered for the official state record.
That mark eclipses the previous all-time record low state temperature of minus 27 degrees, set at at Vinita, Feb. 13, 1905, and Watts, Jan. 18, 1930.
Also, the Mesonet station at Medford recorded a wind chill of minus 47 degrees at 7:45 a.m. setting a Mesonet record.
The Oklahoma Mesonet, which began in 1994, has 120 stations throughout Oklahoma.
————————————-
Hey Watts, you just went down! 🙂
Where is the -31F:
“That’s me in the corner. That’s me in the spotlight. I’m Losing my global warming religion…
“drewski says:
February 11, 2011 at 6:58 pm
According to NASA, January 2011 was — GLOBALLY — the 11th WARMEST since 1880. And this has occurred during the continuing solar minimum and a strong La Nina.”
And here is what Phil Jones said in February of 2009:
“C – Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?
No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant.”
So how should I interpret your comment above? Is it that you would agree that the negative trend that Jones referred to is continuing?
Smokey, how does this graph mitigate anything I have written? Peaks and troughs still need triggers.
I know, you could open a new branch of physics — effect without a cause — brilliant. I will call the Nobel committee today — you could revolutionize science. Just be sure that your research isn’t published in SPPI or Energy and Environment — you will get laughed out of the room.
Werner, UHI effects could be a reason — good question — I will need more research. But what if it turns out that many of these records occurred in rural areas or that this UHI effect was taken into account — what will be your answer then?
drewski says:
February 11, 2011 at 8:48 am
However when 19 NATIONS covering more than a quarter of the earths land surface (or roughly 200 times larger than Oklahoma) set all-time heat records in 2010 this blog was strangely quiet.
Your exaggeration is so bad you make me not respect you. Entire nations did not do this.
drewski says:
February 11, 2011 at 5:18 pm
Over the past century the ratio of record highs to lows slightly exceed 1:1 in the 1950s,
The study you are referring to did not include the 1930’s, the Dust Bowl years in the United States. It is propaganda to say “Over the past century” since the study does not cover the past century. Romm like to use this study too. Romm is a pure propagandist who is paid by a far left organization to run that blog. Did you get your ideas from his blog?
drewski says:
February 11, 2011 at 5:18 pm
From January 2000 to October 24, 2010, 310,531 record high temperatures were set across the contiguous United States
These records have not been adjusted for UHI. Slow down drewski. We aren’t so naive here.
drewski
You picked out records from single locations in a nation. But you made it sound like areas covering entire nations were in record heat. At any given time there are record highs and lows occurring.
Also, you did not provide any links so anyone could verify your claims for themselves. You are half baked.
drewski says:
February 11, 2011 at 8:48 am
more than a quarter of the earths land surface
This did not happen. Be a little more careful next time.
drewski says:
February 11, 2011 at 9:48 pm
I, myself, prefer tried and true (i.e. established) companies and organizations for my goods and information. Science works the same way
Great, then go and be happy with it.
You’ve been here for 13 hours trying to convince people of your ‘tried and true’ science. I have learned that you guys work harder the less you feel convinced of your ‘tried and true’ global warming beliefs. So I don’t know if you’re trying to convince others, or yourself.
The truth is if this web sites really was so far off as you keep trying to make it appear to be you wouldn’t need to work so hard to convince anyone. But you know in your instincts it’s not off. You know you have to be here working all you can to do damage control for failed global warming ‘science’. Everyone knows it’s a failure, and you do to. If you didn’t know it you would be out doing something else.
Ok, I’ve been here 1/2 hour. That’s more than enough. I don’t feel the need to persist for 13 hours trying to convince anyone.
night drewski. Sleep well and dream of dead polar bears, starving people, and sickly hues of light coming from twisty straw light bulbs.
“The truth is if this web sites really was so far off as you keep trying to make it appear to be you wouldn’t need to work so hard to convince anyone.”
That is a belly laugh — I am not the one making a cold day in Oklahoma into a “Global Event”. I am not the one who says “shit happens” (natural cycles) without a thought in their heads about HOW shit happens. I am not the one who carries on endlessly about how cold it is in my 1.5% of the globe while conveniently ignoring an area immediately to the north and west — TWICE THAT SIZE — which is abnormally and persistently warm.
SCEPTICS = So Called Experts Perpetually Talking In Circles
Oh, and Amino — want to add up the land mass of these countries that set all-time heat records in 2010? Start with Russia then continue with the larger countries of Africa, the Middle East and Asia. One thing is for sure, it will be HUNDREDS of times bigger than Oklahoma.
Russia, Ukraine, Cyprus, Finland, Qatar, Sudan, Niger, Saudi Arabia, Chad, Kuwait, Iraq, Pakistan, Burma, Ascension Island, Solomon Islands, and Colombia.
Peace be with you to those who have brains but do not use them — my God of Global Warming, Celsius, bestows his blessing upon you. (I can imagine the replies already).
Ciao
Paul Deacon says:
February 10, 2011 at 10:43 am
“That mark eclipses the previous all-time record low state temperature of minus 27 degrees, set at at Vinita, Feb. 13, 1905, and Watts, Jan. 18, 1930.”
*********************************************************
Anthony – they starting naming weather stations after you before you existed. I’m impressed.
REPLY: Oh, I existed, but in a state of widely scattered atoms – Anthony
(-; some of those atoms were CO2, my o my, Anthony Watts was a greenhose gas, now he is a CO2 sink.
Maybe we can “Steig” the cold, and spread it more then 1200 K.
A new word enters the lexicon
Amino and Smokey, I wanted to give you guys a break from drewski
I was shutting doe the computer when these two posts pop up and I had to respond.
This is what phil Jones ACTUALLY said:
An observed warming trend of 0.12 degrees C per decade between 1995 to 2009 was “not significant at the 95% significance level.” On the other hand, he said, it was quite close to being statistically significant.
There here was no minus 0.12 quote — so, when you start to lose an argument you just throw out bold face lies?
And this one will go into my Hall of Fame:
Drewski: “So Tom R and Smokey, you don’t believe what the world’s foremost science academies tell you, but you must believe in something. It must be something pretty infallible to trump EVERY national science academy — care to share what that is?”
Chris: “They don’t have to.”
Priceless.
What dataset is Drewski using? UAH data showed January at -0.01 of normal. That is about as average as you can get, and is nowhere near the warmest eleven months.
Isn’t UAH using a NASA satellite? How can Drewski say “According to NASA, January 2011 was — GLOBALLY — the 11th WARMEST since 1880.” Has Hansen’s data really gotten so incredibly different from UAH?
It’s amazing how a troll like Drewski can butt in and disrupt a friendly conversation about record cold.
By the way, years ago, when down and out, I crashed at a campground further west than Oklahoma on I-40, and spent a winter at the Continental Divide. It was far enough south to have warmth during the winter, but when the wind turned north it sure did get cruel.
One thing I recall is that English Sparrows, a non-native species, had a growing population in Gallup, New Mexico, but then there was a spell of the cruel north winds, and they were flopping about and dying on the sidewalks.
The dying birds tried to huddle in the south-facing doorways, that caught the sun. It was pretty amazing how different the micro-climates were, between south-facing and north-facing cliffs. The south-facing mesa-sides would be all prickly pear and barrel cactus, while 100 feet away the north-facing side of a canyon would hold clinging spruce and pinion pine.
The thin air did not seem to carry the heat as effectively as it does at sea-level. You could really feel the difference between walking the sunny north-side of a street, as opposed to walking in the shadow of the south-side. The snow was gone nearly as soon as the sun came out, on the north-side, but lingered for days on the south-side.
Water most definitely did not boil at 100 C. I was puzzled, when I tried to boil some rice and beans, (which was all I could afford at the time,) over a fire at the campground, because the blasted stuff simply would not cook. Then a Hispanic fellow, (whose family had lived in the area over 400 years,) showed me how to fry the rice, before you simmered it in tomato sauce. I think he spared me from starvation, and freezing like those English Sparrows.
It’s amazing how haughty and high-and-mighty some get about things like thermometers and temperature. Once you leave your computer and get out into the world, life makes you a lot more humble.
How cold it feels is very subjective, and it is amazing how much warmer it gets after you eat. If you don’t believe it, work outside in the cold, and then go inside and eat a piece of toast with honey on it, and then go back outside and continue working. You will swear the temperature has risen fifteen degrees, though the stupid thermometer will tell you the temperature has dropped a degree or two.
Also the world gets a lot warmer when a Hispanic fellow shows you how to cook Spanish rice. Kindness may not be measured by a thermometer, but it is never forgotten.
Hopefully Drewski will learn this at some point.
>> drewski says:
February 11, 2011 at 9:33 pm
So Tom R and Smokey, you don’t believe what the world’s foremost science academies tell you, but you must believe in something. It must be something pretty infallible to trump EVERY national science academy — care to share what that is?
<<
First off, the statements from the 'national science academies' you speak of are just statements from the political types at the top who like to run things. To my knowledge, none of these academies has actually polled it's members. One in particular (I think it was the NAS) refused to do so in spite of a petition from a significant number of members.
Secondly, you ask what I 'believe.' I believe my own observations and historical records. By my own observation the freeze line for citrus in Florida is 100 miles south of where it was in the early 20th century. By my own observation the sea level in the Florida Keys has not increased by even an inch since 1972.
What I don't believe are the adjustments to the raw temperatures made by someone proven willing to break the law in order to (in his opinion) save the planet. If he's willing to break the law to save the planet, why wouldn't he be willing to fudge the data in order to save the planet?
What I don't believe is that 95% of adjustments to raw measurements just happen to fall in the direction of increased alarmism, or that TOB adjustments need to be an order of magnitude larger than urban heating.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/ushcn/ts.ushcn_anom25_diffs_urb-raw_pg.gif
What I don't believe is the warmist's claim that the medieval warm period was a regional phenomenon limited to Greenland and Europe. A regional phenomenon that lasted for 200 years? Do you really buy that?
What I don't believe are 'global' temperatures before 1979, but maybe you can point out where the sensors were located that measured the air temperature over the 70% of the planet covered by ocean.
“drewski says:
February 12, 2011 at 1:17 am
I was shutting doe the computer when these two posts pop up and I had to respond.
This is what phil Jones ACTUALLY said:
An observed warming trend of 0.12 degrees C per decade between 1995 to 2009 was “not significant at the 95% significance level.” On the other hand, he said, it was quite close to being statistically significant.
There here was no minus 0.12 quote — so, when you start to lose an argument you just throw out bold face lies?
And this one will go into my Hall of Fame:”
WHOA THERE! (By the way, I should have said the quotes were made in 2010 and not 2009.) However see the site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
The quote you are referring to is the answer to question B in which he said what you did. But have you never read question C and its answer? THAT is what I was referring to. Quote B was about the last 15 years, but quote C was about the last 8 years.
(P.S. As for the your comment about UHI, let me know what you find out and I will cross that bridge when I come to it.)
Caleb says:
February 12, 2011 at 4:34 am
What dataset is Drewski using? … How can Drewski say “According to NASA, January 2011 was — GLOBALLY — the 11th WARMEST since 1880.”
Drewski is using the GISS data set at http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
In this case, being the 11th warmest January is quite reasonable. In comparison with UAH, with their anomaly at -0.01, approximately 15 of the last 30 years would be colder so GISS was in the ball park here. However it was the November reading of GISS that really raised eyebrows when GISS claimed it was the warmest November of all time in the middle of a strong La Nina and low sunspots.
drewski says:
February 12, 2011 at 12:21 am
TWICE THAT SIZE — which is abnormally and persistently warm.
No need to yell. You can hear yourself.
Abnormal? Would you bother to prove it’s abnormal? I bet you aren’t interested in proof. You just want to say things that make you believe the sky is falling.
drewski
Here’s some real data:
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/screenhunter_47-feb-10-08-19.gif?w=634&h=476
See all the purple and blue dots? All of those are record cold. It’s not just Oklahoma. How many hours are you going to be here trying to explain that away? Or should I ask how many days?
David says:
February 12, 2011 at 1:13 am
Amino and Smokey, I wanted to give you guys a break from drewski
Thanks, but he’s an easy target. And he didn’t provide any links to data. He sure did talk big. I guess he’s talking about the fish that got away—we never saw it, BUT! We should have seen how big it was!
;O)
Werner Brozek says:
February 12, 2011 at 9:22 am
when GISS claimed it was the warmest November of all time in the middle of a strong La Nina
Yes, that does get ones attention.
drewski says:
“…Smokey, you don’t believe what the world’s foremost science academies tell you, but you must believe in something. It must be something pretty infallible to trump EVERY national science academy — care to share what that is?”
Glad you asked. I prefer to take Prof Richard Lindzen’s climate knowledge base over a bunch of non-climatologists. You, on the other hand, believe what non-experts tell you. Well, to each his own. But relying on the opinions of non-experts explains why you don’t understand the issue.
Next, regarding my graph of the Holocene, you just don’t get it, which is clear from your response:
“Smokey, how does this graph mitigate anything I have written? Peaks and troughs still need triggers.”
That graph makes it clear that natural climate variability is the same over the past ten thousand years. Nothing is different in the current climate from the past ten millennia. What we are observing are natural fluctuations, and contrary to your misinformed belief that “triggers” are necessary to explain natural variability, I’ll let Dr Lindzen educate you – because you are badly in need of education:
I suggest you take a few weeks to read the WUWT archives. It is apparent that you get your misinformation from climate alarmist echo chambers. Bad move. The wheat is separated from the chaff through discussion, and blogs like realclimate censor so heavily that you can only hear one side of the discussion. Hence, you are misinformed and don’t even realize it.
drewski says:
SCEPTICS = So Called Experts Perpetually Talking In Circles
=============================================
Hey Drewski….two can play at that game:
ALARMISTS =
Apparatchik Losers Advancing Regurgitated Misinformation & Institutionalized Shoddy Two-bit Science
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
drewski says:
February 12, 2011 at 1:17 am
Chris: “They don’t have to.”
Priceless.
========================
Have you ever heard of something called the Null Hypothesis?
Apparently not!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA