Subject: Hottest Month Ever!
Posted by: kufan888
Date: Aug 09 12
According to NOAA, July 2012 breaks a record that previously belonged to July 1936 at the peak of the Dust Bowl. It was not only the hottest July on record for the lower 48, but the hottest of any moth since records began 117 years ago. SO far this year a total of 5 months (January, March, April, May, and now July) Have been a top 4 warmest making this the hottest start to the year on record. On top of it all lack of rain is adding to the problem in the midwest. How is the Heat/Draught efffecting your area? And what do you think about this year being compared to the dustbowl (a pretty big deal) in regards to climate, ect.? Maybe just a little bit frightening?
I live in Kansas, we had almost no winter... actually I'm pretty sure we hit or almost hit 100 back in march! Crazy. Also We've seen VERY little rainfall. I heard the chistmas trees and pumpkins are doing horrid... not to mention all the other failed crops. I feel really bad for the farmers and people who depend on the weather to make a living (I live in the city). Prices are expected to go up on many things... like milk. Cows don't produce nearly as much when they are hot.
Posted by: kufan888
Date: Aug 09 12
According to NOAA, July 2012 breaks a record that previously belonged to July 1936 at the peak of the Dust Bowl. It was not only the hottest July on record for the lower 48, but the hottest of any moth since records began 117 years ago. SO far this year a total of 5 months (January, March, April, May, and now July) Have been a top 4 warmest making this the hottest start to the year on record. On top of it all lack of rain is adding to the problem in the midwest. How is the Heat/Draught efffecting your area? And what do you think about this year being compared to the dustbowl (a pretty big deal) in regards to climate, ect.? Maybe just a little bit frightening?
I live in Kansas, we had almost no winter... actually I'm pretty sure we hit or almost hit 100 back in march! Crazy. Also We've seen VERY little rainfall. I heard the chistmas trees and pumpkins are doing horrid... not to mention all the other failed crops. I feel really bad for the farmers and people who depend on the weather to make a living (I live in the city). Prices are expected to go up on many things... like milk. Cows don't produce nearly as much when they are hot.
26 replies. On page 1 of 2 pages. 1 2
daver852 
|
Well, there's no doubt that this has been a hot, dry summer in the Midwest; the hottest and driest that I can remember in my lifetime, anyway. But two years ago we had the coolest and wettest summer of my experience. Is 2012 really the hottest summer ever? Well, that depends. For some reason, NASA keeps tinkering with the actual data (they call it an "adjustment"). So before you start thinking the sky is falling, you ought to read this article: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/08/dear-noaa-and-seth-which-1930s-were-you-referring-to-when-you-say-july-is-the-record-warmest/ Reply #1. Aug 09 12, 6:32 AM |
satguru
|
These media claims are utter bilge, once you check as Dave has done you find article after article showing how wrong they actually are, and if you take into account the adjustments the US hasn't even warmed for around a century, the figures were released this week showing the adjustments made were greater than the differences between years, and instead of allowing for the known urban heat effect and averaging the vast areas without any stations they simply doubled the results. So far no one has come back to explain why, although considering the official reason for adjustment is to moderate excess urban heat the altered figures speak for themselves and no doubt defy explanation. You have to look behind every single media alarmist claim about the climate (like last week's three day Greenland melt) as once you do few stand up on further investigation. Reply #2. Aug 10 12, 5:49 PM |
REDVIKING57
|
So there you have it, kufan. Kansas hasn't really been hotter than hell the last few months. It's just your imagination and more evidence of the relentless media campaign to convince us of the bogus theory of climate change. Is that an elephant I see in the room? Nope...............it's a giant thermometer! Reply #3. Aug 10 12, 8:50 PM |
lesley153
|
Human mothers feeding their babies drink more and nurse more in hot weather. Wouldn't cows do the same, even though their lactation is artificially invoked? Reply #4. Aug 11 12, 7:00 AM |
| daver852
|
Yes, it has been hot for the past few months - extremely hot. But today's high is going to be 83 degrees. Guess we had better start preparing for the next Ice Age. Periods of extreme heat and extreme cold are a natural part of the weather cycle. They don't prove that man-made global warming is taking place. If the theory of global warming were true, we would see a rise in global temperatures at least rougly corresponding to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, and that just hasn't happened. There are too many other factors at work that offset and counterbalance the effects of a few additional ppm of carbon dioxide. And don't forget that one major volcanic eruption releases more CO2 than all of humanity produces in several years. Nearly all the predictions concerning the effects of global warming have failed to materialize. For example, the last time I checked, the Maldives are still above water. Reply #5. Aug 11 12, 7:38 AM |
Aedan57
|
Northeast Regional Climate Center at Cornell is repoting the period from Jan. through July 2012 are the hottest 7 month period since records have been kept (1895). There may have been warmer years prior to 1895, it would take some historical research to try to answer that. I'm still on the fence about climate change and human activity effect. Reply #6. Aug 11 12, 3:30 PM |
| daver852
|
Well, they may say that, but it isn't necessarily true. As I pointed out previously, this is only the hottest July, summer, what you will, if some questionable "adjustments" are made to the raw data. Which means, as one observer has noted, they can come up with a new "hottest" whenever they want. There's actually quite a bit of evidence that he 1930s were the hottest decade, in U.S. history, at least: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/08/11/1230-consecutive-months-in-a-row-of-noaa-increasingly-upwards-adjustments-in-temperature/ http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/08/10/a-simple-proof-that-the-1930s-were-hotter/ Reply #7. Aug 11 12, 6:47 PM |
kufan888
|
Oh yes, I agree that that media makes too much of a fuss about it :) I also remember when we were a jungle a couple years back. We have also recently had some pretty bad winters too, compared to this years lack of one. It definately swings from one extreme to the other - which has always happened and always will. I have always been intrigued by the weather (I love huge storms and would love to go storm chasing) so I watch the weather channel a lot. I definately know that almost everything that comes out there mouths is wrong, or an exaggeration. We get huge storms when they say little about it and rarely do when they make a big deal about it. I didn't mean to make it seem like I was contributing to the mass media panic, I just thought I'd share and see what others had to say- strike up a conversation you might say :) ...But man do I wish we could get some good rain... I believe theres some in the forecast. I'm glad the tempartures have cooled down a bit and I am curious to see what the fall/winter will bring! Reply #8. Aug 11 12, 7:51 PM |
| kufan888
|
Oh yes, I'd also like to add that I'm hesitant to lean either way on the issue of global warming/climate change simply because I'm just not well versed on the matter itself. I mostly pay attention to the weather here and now but it might be interesting to look into further as you have suggested. Thanks for the interesting article. Reply #9. Aug 11 12, 8:01 PM |
| satguru
|
Temperatures work on a standard tree/branch format, and the branches people look at- local temps, monthly etc cannot be inconsistent with the tree itself. Therefore you begin with a single monthly high, and then have to put it into context. As there are twelve months the first thing you do (just like with our recent rainfall which evened out over a few months as it always does) is look at the months either side of it. Then the whole year etc. Once you get wider and wider the peaks tends to level out, as Dave explained, the temperature rise itself worldwide has never been remarkable- 0.8C in 150 years isn't even outside the error bars. Secondly we have these adjustments. This month somehow Anthony Watts has managed to obtain a quarter of US raw temp data and shows quite amazingly they adjusted up for heat islands (not down, which is the main reason they make them) and then (as had already been shown on one diagram) filled in all the spaces without stations in hot red. Believe it or not the majority of raw temp data is private property and covered by the law used for sensitive business information, even though nearly all is measured and held by universities and government institutions and used in public policy. I've never known any natural scientific data to be protected by injunctions before and would suggest it is not exactly what science is expected to do. Currently the known quarter of adjustments made have been greater than the changes themselves, eg if the temp rose 0.3C they then added a further 0.4C. This was done evenly across the board, meaning before the adjustments the US temps have been flat, and either way peaked in the 30s, while CO2 rose at a level expected to cause a measurable rise as late as the 1970s. You only need simple direct logic here. The 1930s had a rise which no one claims wasn't natural, yet a similar rise decades later was blamed on CO2 simply because it was a lot higher. That was 20 years ago, the models were posted worldwide going forward to 2100. 20 years later we are below the lowest estimate by some way. I don't know how long it takes to decide the models are not performing, but it shouldn't take much longer as while the CO2 is still rising the temperatures are not. Finally the last element to use when taking these local maxima and minima is to compare every single area worldwide per month to see how many are produced. I haven't done that myself (someone must have as it's an essential part of the greater sum), but if you take one peak in isolation only to discover they occur every single month at a standard range then this piece of news has had its head and other lower organs cut off before it ever lived. The message here is isolated data means absolutely nothing outside its context. Reply #10. Aug 14 12, 9:27 PM |
| daver852
|
Well said, Dave. By the way, if last month was the hottest July ever, we must be well on our way to the coolest August ever. It has been just beautiful here; high today of 82 degrees (28C). We still need rain, though. I'm hoping it doesn't show up in the form of snow this winter. Wait a minute, I forgot. We no longer have winter. Reply #11. Aug 14 12, 10:37 PM |
| daver852
|
Coldest August ever? http://iceagenow.info/2012/08/141-record-lows-yesterday-8-record-highs/ Reply #12. Aug 20 12, 7:17 PM |
| satguru
|
They have been subtracting the adjusted figures from others not from that source, and going back 100 years or so seems to have returned the peak back where it was known before, right at the start of the 1930s. That's where the records were, no question of anything but natural causes, one's even scanned years worth of paper articles from the time with one similar story after another, apparently from 2012 until you read the date. People love extremes. They see anything unusual, the papers have pages to fill and sell, and have to find anything different they can, and weather fits the bill. Till now it was 'interesting weather' and that was it. Now the politicians tell us it's a case of impending meltdown. Same weather, same ratio of extreme days to normal (people do record it all somewhere), but relate it to high CO2 and it's like blaming it on satellites as the hockey stick didn't rise till the day they switched from land measurements. Others dragged up all the extreme low temperatures this year around the world, I think the final figure had them winning by about 80-20% overall, but the media only want hot for now, it pays their sales. Reply #13. Aug 22 12, 6:38 PM |
| Shiningstar7
|
This has been the warmest year on record. Reply #14. Dec 04 12, 2:55 AM |
| satguru
|
Since when exactly? I am guessing you are referring to the satellite records which began in 1979, so that would narrow it down to within 33 years, but that's news to me as this looks quite different and you haven't left a link for yours either. This is up to august (I haven't found one more recent yet) but unless it's shot up since I can't see how that's the case http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_current.gif Reply #15. Dec 04 12, 6:45 PM |
| daver852
|
2012 warmest year on record? Not even close. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/29/wmo_global_temp_figures_2012_doha_ninth_hottest/ Reply #16. Dec 04 12, 10:21 PM |
| satguru
|
The exact figures have also arrived on my page http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/9708144/Doha-Global-warming-is-slowing-down-says-Met-Office.html# I can't see how anyone can interpret this as the warmest, plus the records did start in 1979, which is hardly a significant time, as it was hotter for 4000 years 4000 years ago, and arguably during the medieval and Roman warm periods due to the physical evidence of farming and crops impossible to grow in colder conditions. That is solid evidence and also demonstrates a worldwide greater crop yield in both periods while deaths fell as fewer people die in warm periods than cold. Reply #17. Dec 05 12, 9:36 PM |
| satguru
|
It looks like they've used records going back to 1850 this time, although the 30s were arguably the warmest, and used totally different methods of measurement from 1979 than before, plus the land based stations were removed in vast numbers, leaving mainly urban ones showing the warmest levels by their locations. That feeds into the total of course and skews the results, so can see there's a clear chance the alteration of sources could easily appear to cause the temperature to rise but many are only either estimated or heavily adjusted so nothing like the original figures. I have pages of examples and the finished product we see is normally very different from the original, and nearly all tilted by 45% from flat, which doesn't seem right to me. Reply #18. Dec 05 12, 9:41 PM |
| daver852
|
I think it has been pretty well established that the 1930s were the hottest decade of the modern era, and that temperatures were considerably warmer a thousand years ago than they are now, and even warmer 4,000 years ago. The only way to show a consistent warming trend is to shamelessly manipulate the data, and hope the proles won't notice. Reply #19. Dec 05 12, 11:09 PM |
| satguru
|
Here is a record going back 600 million years, probably the most comprehensive site of historic temperature records in existence. I would ask a single question. If the CO2 levels had not risen, would anyone have raised the issue of a small rise in temperature otherwise? The major theme of global warming are the claimed rises way ahead from 2050-2100, based on the rising CO2. So far the temperature is heading for a 1.4-1.7C rise over a century at the current rate, while the IPCC are looking at 3C and others like Hansen 6C. But we won't be here to know, and so far we are way below the predictions made in the 90s. And comparing the past cycles this one fits perfectly, and CO2 wasn't a consideration in any of them, so apparently has no effect whatsoever, as those rises and falls have been going on a very long time without it. http://www.paulmacrae.com/?p=62 Reply #20. Dec 08 12, 11:52 AM |
26 replies. On page 1 of 2 pages. 1 2
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
|
: