Crazy Weather...

Apparently for the USA overall it has been a mild winter. Demand for heating oil and such is down....Price of oil has dropped to nearly $50/bbl.
 
Climate Experts Worry as 2006 Is Hottest Year on Record in U.S.

By Marc Kaufman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 10, 2007; Page A01

Last year was the warmest in the continental United States in the past 112 years -- capping a nine-year warming streak "unprecedented in the historical record" that was driven in part by the burning of fossil fuels, the government reported yesterday.

According to the government's National Climatic Data Center, the record-breaking warmth -- which caused daffodils and cherry trees to bloom throughout the East on New Year's Day -- was the result of both unusual regional weather patterns and the long-term effects of the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901949.html
 
Cypress,

1) Quit assuming people listen to Rush just because they disagree with you. I have NEVER listened to a single broadcast of his (outside of his brief horrific stint on ESPN)

2) I was going by numbers as of 2005 as I had not seen anything indicating that 2006 was worse than 1998. I will look for the source info from the article you posted... side note: thank you for that.

USCitizen...

8 years because 1998 was the warmest year on record. Temps have held steady since then. (will check Cypress' intel to see if that did indeed change with 2006... so that may not be true anymore)
 
Superfreak said:
Cypress,

1) Quit assuming people listen to Rush just because they disagree with you. I have NEVER listened to a single broadcast of his (outside of his brief horrific stint on ESPN)

2) I was going by numbers as of 2005 as I had not seen anything indicating that 2006 was worse than 1998. I will look for the source info from the article you posted... side note: thank you for that.

USCitizen...

8 years because 1998 was the warmest year on record. Temps have held steady since then. (will check Cypress' intel to see if that did indeed change with 2006... so that may not be true anymore)
Click to expand...
Remember, too, that the U.S. is only a tiny part of the whole system. When we talk about "global mean temperature" then we really mean global, with all local vatiations "averaged out" as it were.
 
"Yes. Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6°C (plus or minus 0.2°C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4°F (0.2 to 0.3°C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S.) have, in fact, cooled over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Warming, assisted by the record El Niño of 1997-1998, has continued right up to the present, with 2001 being the second warmest year on record after 1998."

Funny that the National Climactic Data Center quoted in the Article still has the above listed on their site.

The ARTICLE talks about US temperatures being higher in 2006, NOT GLOBAL temps. It also leaves out AK and HI, so it is not even a complete picture of the US.
 
Superfreak said:
"Yes. Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6°C (plus or minus 0.2°C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4°F (0.2 to 0.3°C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S.) have, in fact, cooled over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Warming, assisted by the record El Niño of 1997-1998, has continued right up to the present, with 2001 being the second warmest year on record after 1998."

Funny that the National Climactic Data Center quoted in the Article still has the above listed on their site.

The ARTICLE talks about US temperatures being higher in 2006, NOT GLOBAL temps. It also leaves out AK and HI, so it is not even a complete picture of the US.
Click to expand...
We, on the other hand, were explicitly talking about global temperatures. You're the one who dragged the article into it, I believe.

Except that I believed wrongly: that was Cypress. Oh well. In any event, temperatures in the United States don't necessarily reflect global trends.

Let me quote Jarod's original post, the one to which you objected:
. . .global warming . . . causes excessive cold as well as heat... on net it results in a hoter climate.
Click to expand...
He was absolutely correct: a net overall increase in temperature can indeed cause local cooling in a small area. Like, say, the United States. In fact, this past year seems to fit the global trend, even if the previous two did not.
 
Last edited:
Superfreak said:
"Yes. Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6°C (plus or minus 0.2°C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4°F (0.2 to 0.3°C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S.) have, in fact, cooled over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Warming, assisted by the record El Niño of 1997-1998, has continued right up to the present, with 2001 being the second warmest year on record after 1998."

Funny that the National Climactic Data Center quoted in the Article still has the above listed on their site.

The ARTICLE talks about US temperatures being higher in 2006, NOT GLOBAL temps. It also leaves out AK and HI, so it is not even a complete picture of the US.
Click to expand...

Global temperatures for 2006 aren't in yet, because they have to compile the ocean surface temperatures.

But, 2005 data say that 2005 was the hottest year ever, globally.

How does that contrast with your statement that we haven't had record temps in eight years? ;)


NASA

"The highest global surface temperature in more than a century of instrumental data was recorded in the 2005 calendar year in the GISS annual analysis."
 
Superfreak said:
Jarod... yes, any idiot can see that calling something "global warming" and then saying that Cold can occur from global warming is idiotic. If you want to call it climate change, fine. Quit calling it global warming because it is not accurate.
Click to expand...


I agree the name is misleading, but if you look further than the name, you will see that what is occuring is exactly as predicted!
 
Jarod... that really was my main point. Calling it global warming is misleading and causes confusion. Call it what it is and you can eliminate that confusion.

I would argue that the changes are not exactly like predicted as the predictions vary by individual. You can find scientists that say by the end of the century we will be anywhere from 2 to 8 degrees warmer on average throughout the world. We have held steady for the past 8-9 years on average globally... and that most certainly is NOT what was predicted ten years ago.
 
"Except that I believed wrongly"

Ornot... I am going with the selective reading glasses. All I saw above was that you were indeed wrong. Enough said. I win. Superfreak! Superfreak! Superfreak!... come on now, chant along...ya know you want to.

;)
 
"The highest global surface temperature in more than a century of instrumental data was recorded in the 2005 calendar year in the GISS annual analysis. However, the error bar on the data implies that 2005 is practically in a dead heat with 1998, the warmest previous year."

Ok Cypress, you got me. It was higher according to the GISS/NASA site in 2005. I do not mind being shown to be wrong... IF I am indeed so. However, note the last line. Practically a dead heat with 1998. Which means that there wasn't a SIGNIFICANT change since 1998. But you were right, so I will give you a small meaningless victory. ;)
 
Superfreak said:
Jarod... that really was my main point. Calling it global warming is misleading and causes confusion. Call it what it is and you can eliminate that confusion.

I would argue that the changes are not exactly like predicted as the predictions vary by individual. You can find scientists that say by the end of the century we will be anywhere from 2 to 8 degrees warmer on average throughout the world. We have held steady for the past 8-9 years on average globally... and that most certainly is NOT what was predicted ten years ago.
Click to expand...



-"We have held steady for the past 8-9 years on average globally..."

Nope, Superfreak. Here's NASA's global mean temperature trend graph. The trend is upward.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2005/2005cal_fig1.gif


-"...and that most certainly is NOT what was predicted ten years ago"


Wrong again super ;)

NASA Website:

"The highest global surface temperature in more than a century of instrumental data was recorded in the 2005 calendar year in the GISS annual analysis.....Recent warming coincides with rapid growth of human-made greenhouse gases. Climate models show that the rate of warming is consistent with expectations (5). The observed rapid warming thus gives urgency to discussions about how to slow greenhouse gas emissions (6)."

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2005/
 
"Our analysis differs from others by including estimated temperatures up to 1200 km from the nearest measurement station (7). The resulting spatial extrapolations and interpolations are accurate for temperature anomalies at seasonal and longer time scales at middle and high latitudes, where the spatial scale of anomalies is set by Rossby waves (7). Thus we believe that the remarkable Arctic warmth of 2005 is real, and the inclusion of estimated arctic temperatures is the primary reason for our rank of 2005 as the warmest year. Other characteristics of our analysis method are summarized in footnote (8).

"The ranking of individual years, however, depends upon differences of only a few hundredths of a degree, which is finer than the accuracy that any method can achieve given observational limitations."

Hmmm.....
"Climate models show that the rate of warming is consistent with expectations "

"However, the error bar on the data implies that 2005 is practically in a dead heat with 1998, the warmest previous year."

So the scientists thought the rate of warming would be practically flat over the last 8 years?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top