I haven’t seen Peterson et al (2013) presented alone yet at WattsUpWithThat. It was referred to in Jim Steele’s excellent WUWT post Fabricating Climate Doom – Part 3: Extreme Weather Extinctions Enron Style.
A who’s who of climatologists, including department heads, from numerous organizations around the United States contributed to Peterson et al (2013) Monitoring and Understanding Changes in Heat Waves, Cold Waves, Floods, and Droughts in the United States: State of Knowledge. Full paper here. The conclusions begin (my boldface):
Four key types of climate extremes (i.e., heat waves, cold waves, floods, and droughts) were assessed. The data indicate that over the last several decades heat waves are generally increasing, while cold waves are decreasing. While this is in keeping with expectations in a warming climate, decadal variations in the number of U.S. heat and cold waves do not correlate that closely with the warming observed over the United States. The drought years of the 1930s had the most heat waves, while the 1980s had the highest number of cold waves. River floods do not show uniform changes across the country; flood magnitudes as represented by trends in annual peak river flow have been decreasing in the Southwest, while flood magnitudes in the Northeast and north-central United States are increasing. Confounding the analysis of trends in flooding is multiyear and even multidecadal variability likely caused by both large-scale atmospheric circulation changes as well as basin-scale “memory” in the form of soil moisture. Droughts too have multiyear and longer variability. Instrumental data indicate that the Dust Bowl of the 1930s and the 1950s drought were the most widespread twentieth-century droughts in the United States, while tree ring data indicate that the megadroughts over the twelfth century exceeded anything in the twentieth century in both spatial extent and duration.
My Figure 1 is Figure 1 from Peterson et al (2013).
Figure 1
Its caption reads:
Fig. 1. Time series of decadal-average values of heat wave (red bars) and cold wave (blue bars) indices. These indices are a normalized (to an average value of 1.0) metric of the number of extreme temperature events for spells of 4-day duration. An event is considered extreme if the average temperature exceeds the threshold for a 1- in 5-yr recurrence. The calculations are based on a network of 711 long-term stations with less than 10% missing temperature values for the period 1895–2010. The horizontal labels give the beginning year of the decade. Recent decades tend to show an increase in the number of heat waves and a decrease in the number of cold waves but, over the long term, the drought years of the 1930s stand out as having the most heat waves. See the SM for details on the daily data used in this analysis and procedures used to calculate the indices.
And to confirm the discussion of drought from the conclusions above, Peterson et al (2013) presented their Figure 4, which I’ve included as my Figure 2.
Figure 2
Its caption reads:
Fig. 4. The percent area of the contiguous United States experiencing moderate to extreme drought [Palmer drought severity index (PDSI) ≤ –2.0] from January 1900 to October 2012 (red curve). Widespread persistent drought occurred in the 1930s (central and northern Great Plains, Northwest, and Midwest), 1950s (southern Great Plains and Southwest), 1980s (West and Southeast), and the first decade of the twenty-first century (West and Southeast). The dotted line is a linear regression over the period of record (linear trend = +0.09% decade–1), the solid line is for January 1931–October 2012 (–0.78% decade–1), and the dashed line is for January 1971–October 2012 (+3.70% decade–1).
Yet some members of the climate science community and the mainstream media continue to spin tall tales about weather growing more extreme in recent years. Nothing but nonsense.


@aaron chmielewski “I have a feeling that much of it is driven by water use”
Theoretically if we kept all sources of heat input constant, by reducing the heat capacity of the landscape we can greatly raise regional temperatures. Indeed we have lost 50% of our wetlands and at least in California hydrologist tell me 99% of the streams have been channelized, which drains the subsurface water and dries the land. If you look at the USHCN annual maximum temperature trends of Tahoe City in California and 200 miles away Battle Mountain in Nevada they report a cooling trend since the 30s. However in between those two stations is Winnemucca which reveals a contrasting steeply rising trend for maximum temperature. Such a contrast can only be created by local landscape changes. And sure enough after the Derby Dam was built on the Truckee River that drains Lake Tahoe in the early 1900’s, Lake Winnemucca was turned into a dry lake correlating with the steep rise in temperature.
Most of the southeast USA has exhibited a well documented cooling trend. Everywhere that is except south Florida where the draining of the Everglades has been associated with less rainfall and higher temperatures.
Read Pielke, R., et al., (1999) The Influence of Anthropogenic Landscape Changes on Weather in South Florida. The Monthly Weather Review. Vol.127, p. 1663-1973
and Marshall, C., et al. (2004) The impact of anthropogenic land-cover change on the Florida peninsula sea breezes and warm sensible weather. Mon. Weather Review., vo. 132, p.28–52.
The Kansas Geological Survey published a decent paper last year titled —
A thousand years of drought and climatic variability in Kansas:
Implications for water resources management
They came to the same conclusion regarding droughts and found that a climate shift occurred in the Great Plains 500 years ago using tree ring data, age dating and defining the timing of sand dune migration, as well as archeological data — supporting previous findings for the central and SW U.S.. Droughts of the 1200-1300s would make the Dust Bowl seem insignificant.
With a library full of research detailing past climate shifts and detailing actual extreme weather it is amazing any scientist can retain credibility when they sound false alarms of “unprecedented” or “record” modern “extreme weather.”
Peterson, Peterson – why is that name familiar? What has he been discredited on before?
Title: “More dirty pool by NCDC’s Karl, Menne, and Peterson”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/23/more-dirty-pool-by-ncdcs-karl-menne-and-peterson/
“When you are faced with budget killing criticisms, I guess in their view playing dirty pool doesn’t seem so bad. Dr. Roger Pielke Senior voiced some similar criticisms of this amateurish behavior on the part of NCDC, Karl, and Menne, saying it amounted to professional
discourtesy. Even NCDC GHCN guru Tom Peterson got into the act early on, writing a ghost authored “talking points” memo about the surfacestations project.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/24/ncdc-writes-ghost-talking-points-rebuttal-to-surfacestations-project/
Hmmm … Peterson … a presumed NOAA “low life” …
.
Nice research, _Jim.