Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Temperatures are generally referred to some kind of long-term, often 30-year average. This is called the “climatology”, meaning the long-term average values of various climate variables. For up-to-date analyses, the period of time is usually taken as being the thirty years from 1981-2010. For Alaska, the usual measure for the overall state average uses twenty “first order” stations in Alaska. These have the longest and best records. We all know that the Arctic is warming now, but it hasn’t always been so.
Now, the climatology is the month-by-month average temperatures for that period. And of course, given the general warming of the planet over the last century, there have been some way colder years in Alaska than the modern 1981-2010 average. Here’s the record of one such year, back when Alaska was really cold.
Note just how extraordinarily cold Alaska can get. Ten of the twelve months were below average. And not just a little bit below average either.
The most surprising thing about the year was that January was a full 14°F (8°C) colder than the modern average. It would be unusual for one single temperature station to be that much colder than the climatology. But to have the average of 20 different stations being so very much colder than the climatology? It shows not just how cold Alaska used to be, but how widespread the cold was as well. It was bitterly cold, not just in one single area but covering almost the entire state.
And it was not just a cold January that year either. March was 7°F colder than usual, the summer was below average, and the start of the next winter was quite cold as well. In addition, the ice in the Bering Sea was much more extensive than usual, and snowfall was 30%-50% above normal.
All in all, it was a pretty brutal time for people living the state, back when Alaska was really cold. It’s fortunate that they made tough people back then, and Alaska is full of them. You’d have to say that it was a bad, cold year overall, 2012 … I’m just glad the world is warmer now.
The source document is here.
w.
PS—don’t bother telling me that weather is not climate … because that’s exactly what I’m pointing out, isn’t it. My main issue is that if January 2012 in Alaska had been 14°F above the average, we’d never have heard the end of it … but 14°F below average attracted little notice at all.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
bdub says:
March 9, 2013 at 2:32 pm
I’m not sure “joke” is the best description for it, I’m not sure what to call it. It was a way to challenge orthodox beliefs.
Because I write for the web and people spend a lot of time telling me what they believe … and because I read the popular articles on climate and the comments on those articles … in other words, I stay abreast of the field, including public attitudes and beliefs.
Actually, bdub, some of us like to just simply state the point, rather than take a sledgehammer and pound in a big sign saying
“For the 1% who didn’t get it, the point is right here! ——>”
Fool you? Whatever gave you the impression I was trying to fool you? I truly didn’t expect to fool anyone. At the end of the post I said that the year was 2012, and left folks to draw their own conclusions.
Fool you? Words fail me, bdub. I tried to explain gently that everyone except you got the joke, and they got the point of the story. It wasn’t hidden or mysterious. I linked to the original document, it’s an interesting read. But you, almost alone among all of the readers, didn’t understand what was going on. So I explained it to you as best I knew how.
A wise man at that point would say “Oh … OK” and leave it at that.
You, on the other hand, take it the other way. Instead of noting that everyone but you got the joke, you want to bitch about how the joke was told …
So you complain that the point was made too subtly, and that I should ring bells and put up big arrows saying “POINT HERE, DON’T MISS IT” … in other words, everyone but you is out of step …
Truly, bdub, the First Rule of Holes applies here … when you’re in one … stop digging.
All the best,
w.
bDub: Try looking at Willis’ article as if it were a murder mystery on TV. At the last scene or two the answer (murderer) is revealed. Willis just employed the same basic literary device. My question to you: are you a mystery lover, or a sitcom lover? In sitcoms you get an instant punch line and it takes very little thinking. It would be an interesting poll of readers here to determine if they are mystery or sitcom lovers. Science is a mystery.
Willis’s eagle flies again!
Barbra & Jack
“…global climate, you cannot take data from one relatively small area…”
Reading comprehension is an acquired skill – go back and re-read the article. It is pretty clear that Willis admits precisely what you are pointing out.
Willis: Heh, not that you need it, [but] I am in a “defend Willis” mood today.
Barbra & Jack Donachy says:
March 9, 2013 at 3:06 pm
First off, get rid of the user name. Am I talking to Barbra, or am I talking to Jack? It’s like those disgusting couples who say “We’re pregnant”. Whichever one of you I’m talking to, get your own separate identity.
Second, if you disagree with something I say, please QUOTE MY WORDS. I can defend my own ideas. I cannot defend what some man/woman might imagine about my ideas.
For example, I said nothing about “global climate”. In fact, I said nothing about “global” at all. Didn’t use the word once.
So when you get off onto how “global climate” is this or that … what on earth does that have to do with me? I said nothing about global anything. That is nothing but your fantasy.
Come back when there’s only one of you, and you are willing to quote whatever it was I said that has you upset. I know it’s not global anything, I didn’t discuss that.
w.
Barbra & Jack Donachy says: “NASA scientists say 2012 was the ninth warmest of any year since 1880″
Wilis says: “if you disagree with something I say, please QUOTE MY WORDS. I can defend my own ideas. I cannot defend what some man/woman might imagine about my ideas.”
Come on Willis, don’t be such a baby. Your whole thread is about a local region on a web site on _global_ climate. The Donachy’s comment is more on topic than your post.
trafamadore says:
March 9, 2013 at 9:11 pm
Come on Willis, don’t be such a baby. Your whole thread is about a local region on a web site on _global_ climate. The Donachy’s comment is more on topic than your post.
——————————————————————–
So following your strange logic, anything posted on here, even a humorous article or WE’s life experience can be connected to Global_Climate?
Interesting.
Willis my mum who hails from Scotland has often used the following phrase when one does not share in a groups understanding. “We’re all out of step except for our (pronounced oor) Jock”. Maybe that can explain bdub difficulty with your tongue in cheek look at Alaska’s “historical” temperatures.
James Bull
trafamadore says (March 9, 2013 at 9:11 pm): “Your whole thread is about a local region on a web site on _global_ climate.”
I suspect WUWT’s owner would dispute your idea of what his site is all about (hint: check the part of the banner that starts out, “Commentary on puzzling things”).
trafamadore says:
March 9, 2013 at 9:11 pm
Actually, if you’d bothered to read the WUWT masthead, you’d have noticed that my post is on a web site dedicated to “puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news”. There have been dozens and dozens of articles on WUWT about regions, and about local areas, and states, and counties, and even the weather at individual stations. Are you possibly so out of touch you’ve never noticed that? Or are you just pretending to be that out of touch?
Or are you simply so desperate for any reason to attack me that you make things up?
In any case, whichever way I try to explain your strange accusation, the prognosis isn’t good.
Do try to keep up, read the masthead, notice a few of the articles, there’s a good fellow … someday you’ll understand that your relentless yapping at my ankles isn’t doing your reputation any good.
w.
… don’t let the Alaskans hear you call it a “local region”, they think it’s a country …
@trafamadore
Come on Willis, don’t be such a baby. Your whole thread is about a local region on a web site on _global_ climate. The Donachy’s comment is more on topic than your post.
Commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology and recent news by Anthony Watts
Here are the rules.
14°F below the average is just the weather in Alaska which is just a small fraction of the globe.
14°F above the average is a sure sign of global warming. It’s worse than we thought.
7°F above the average is a sure sign of global warming. It’s worse than we thought.
David Johnson says:
March 9, 2013 at 9:01 am
“bdub’s comment”
I never cease to be amazed at the propensity of so many members of the human race to parade their own stupidity for all to see.
————–
Seconded.
Is it just me or are the trolls out in force today looking for any pretext for argument?
Willis is correct that any warm spell is declarative evidence of global warming as is any cold spell, tornado, hurricane, blizzard.
All of it obscures the search for the truth.
I am reminded of the science guy’s CO2 in a jar video that was shown to millions of children as proof of the coming global warming disaster. The purpose of that video was to indoctrinate not educate.
Before they started with the carbon dioxide nonsense, people looked at the planets to explain weather cycles, rightly or wrongly.
see here
http://www.cyclesresearchinstitute.org/cycles-astronomy/arnold_theory_order.pdf
to quote from the above paper:
“A Weather Cycle as observed in the Nile Flood cycle, Max rain followed by Min rain, appears discernible with
maximums at 1750, 1860, 1950 and minimums at 1670, 1800, 1900 and a minimum at 1990 predicted.
The range in meters between a plentiful flood and a drought flood seems minor in the numbers but real in consequence….
end quote
According to my table for maxima, I calculate the date where the sun decided to take a nap, as being around 1995.
and not 1990 as William Arnold predicted. please correct me if you think I am wrong.
This is looking at energy-in. I think earth reached its maximum output (means) a few years later, around 1998.
Anyway, look again at my best sine wave plot for my data
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
1900 minimum flooding – end of the warming
1950 maximum flooding – end of cooling
1995 minimum flooding – end of warming.
predicted 2035-2040 – maximum flooding – end of cooling.
Do you see the pertinent correlation with my sine wave?
I really don’t trust the base line of temperatures before 1925 as it seems nobody can supply me with a calibration certificate of thermometer from those days.
Also, the way of recording, meant that you did a reading every 4 hours or so,
which may have affected the average for the day, never mind the fact if people were sick or on leave and the job just did not “get done”
I could be wrong, but I thought I’d left a comment here last night. A few jars and Springing forward might be clouding my memory.
Something to do with Bettles? Mod?
Has anyone noticed how few flowers are in bloom in UK at the moment? I am so used to the meeja commenting on early blooming that I had expected them to notice how late things are this year and draw our attention to it. Silly me.
PS Not off topic as it follows Willis’ theme of howling about high temps and ignoring low ones.
DaveS says:
March 10, 2013 at 3:37 am
David Johnson says:
March 9, 2013 at 9:01 am
“bdub’s comment”
I never cease to be amazed at the propensity of so many members of the human race to parade their own stupidity for all to see.
————–
Seconded.
————-
Where’s a Like Button when you need it?
cn
Perhaps cold winters, especially in the northern hemisphere, will be the norm….
http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/5903/
The authors are not notably rabid sceptics as far as I can tell, just scientists doing what they do.
“My main issue is that if January 2012 in Alaska had been 14°F above the average, we’d never have heard the end of it … but 14°F below average attracted little notice at all.”
I suppose that is testable. The monthly anomalies in alaska are somewhat erratic ( rail to rail in excess of 5C) so it should be easy to look at the announcements over the past 5 years ( lets say)
and find a time when a single state ( any state, not just alaska, giving you 50 bites at the apple) was called out for its high monthly temperature. Not drought, not tornados, but called out exclusively for its temperature extreme and soley its monthly extreme.
you see if we never would have heard the end of it, we’d still be hearing it and I cant for the life of me remember any time a single state was called out for a single months temperature.. In short, even if we had heard it, we have heard the end of it.
So, there are the words quoted exactly. Next, I’ll show you how much notice the extra cold actually generated.
bdub says: “…”
Stephan Lewandowsky, is that you?
I’d like to see the January graph 24,063 years ago when it was under a mile of ice.
Here is an interesting graph of Anchorage with data of the speed of warming and/or cooling showing an a-c wave from 1942. See below the global chart:
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
Didn’t see Alaske getting much in this story about March 2012 http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/noaa-release-unprecedented-mar/63833 which would seem to illustrate Willis’s point exceedingly well.
Here is a story of unprecedented warmth from March 2012 http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/noaa-release-unprecedented-mar/63833 – Interesting that they don not mention Alaska once. Which would seen to illustrate Willis’s point very well