jtom
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 248
|
Post by jtom on Mar 11, 2010 13:47:13 GMT
Evidently, it must have been very warm in the S. Pacific, or maybe the Antarctic was only -58 degrees, not -67, but until we grow food in those areas, I don't particularly care.
I have expressed thoughts like yours, Hunter. The global average, especially the way it is derived now, is a meaningless metric. Climate isn't global, it's local, and obviously CO2 is having no effect on the local climes where people live. The only real threat to Man is cold, and we're starting to experience it. Warm is good. Good for people. Good for crops.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Mar 11, 2010 13:51:55 GMT
If local climate was only important, then here in western Europe we would have severe AGW. Temperatures have risen about 1 C in half a century. However, if you would live in parts of the US, you'd say that there has been little global warming. Quite contradictory, and not very useful as a climate indicator.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Mar 11, 2010 13:54:24 GMT
jtom: Quit the alarmism will you . If you want alarmism - then the other effect of these Feb temps yet to come will be the shortage of some foods - perhaps lots of them. Much of the Florida crops from citrus to tomatoes has been ruined as have almost all the soft fruits for spring sales. California has not fared too well either with the early droughts being replaced by heavy rains. Unfortunately, the record warm temps must have been somewhere that food does not grow. I'm surprised to hear that all the food in the world grows in Florida and California. That is very alarming indeed! Just joking of course, but take a look at the UAH temperature anomalies of January 2010 for example (I haven't seen them for February 2010 yet) then you can see where it was warm or cold. You'll see a lot of yellow, orange and red in the world, even in the NH.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Mar 11, 2010 18:16:37 GMT
If you want alarmism - then the other effect of these Feb temps yet to come will be the shortage of some foods - perhaps lots of them. Much of the Florida crops from citrus to tomatoes has been ruined as have almost all the soft fruits for spring sales. California has not fared too well either with the early droughts being replaced by heavy rains. Unfortunately, the record warm temps must have been somewhere that food does not grow. I'm surprised to hear that all the food in the world grows in Florida and California. That is very alarming indeed! Just joking of course, but take a look at the UAH temperature anomalies of January 2010 for example (I haven't seen them for February 2010 yet) then you can see where it was warm or cold. You'll see a lot of yellow, orange and red in the world, even in the NH. " take a look at the UAH temperature anomalies of January 2010 for example (I haven't seen them for February 2010 yet) then you can see where it was warm or cold." Not a lot of food grows in the lower troposphere either ;-) China has had extreme cold too in their crop growing areas, the rice exporters are now stopping exports. there have been riots in Mexico due to lack of corn.... Pointing at UAH plots and GHCN graphics does not feed people. If the land is frozen when people should be planting and winter starts in early October instead of November leading to very short growing seasons and crop losses - then there will be problems. It used to be the job of the climatologists and long range weather forecasters to enable the food producers to grow food, not to bid for government research contracts dependent on cataclysmic model interpolations for a century's time. So far many of these research climatologists have one thing in common - total failure to forecast next year's weather in a way a farmer (or anyone) can use. They have even been beaten completely in 'skill' (in the US) by the farmers' almanac! This is why the UK Met Office has abandoned long range forecasts - it hasn't stopped their 100 year forecasts though.
|
|
|
Post by hunter on Mar 11, 2010 22:12:31 GMT
"This is why the UK Met Office has abandoned long range forecasts - it hasn't stopped their 100 year forecasts though." This is great point- the Met's usefulness is being destroyed by its obsession with AGW. The Met was to be the practical tool to help Britannia make good crops at home, and to rule the seas of the ocean. Now they are giving up on both, in order to sell a bunch of apocalyptic clap-trap to the masses. the world has spent something in the range of ~$50billionUS on AGW. For what? Failed treaty after failed treaty, a UN effort that is financially conflicted, ethically bankrupt, and scientifically useless; predictions that have failed under scrutiny by lay persons as ridiculous; people who say with a straight face that a seriuos winter is actually a warming event; etc. etc. the cost of AGw has been great amounts of treasure, and apparently, the intelligence levels of millions of believers.
|
|
solarstormlover54
Level 2 Rank
Hot and dry trend Since January. Looks to continue at least through the first half of May.
Posts: 54
|
Post by solarstormlover54 on Mar 15, 2010 0:10:36 GMT
A not about February Temps. While the USA had one of the coldest winters ever it was the complete opposite In Canada
Winter 2009/2010 turned out as the Warmest in Canadian history. Nationally the Temps was 4C above the norm beating the old Record of 3.9C set in 2005/06. Had it not been for the brutally cold December it would have been even warmer.
The very strong arctic osculation literally sucked all the air out of the arctic and into the USA and Europe, and much faster than the polar air could recharge.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 15, 2010 0:32:53 GMT
I can vouch for that one solarstormlover54.
|
|
|
Post by crakar24 on Mar 15, 2010 1:16:14 GMT
Well here in South Australia we had an average summer March is a little cooler so far, we had a crop yield that was second highest on record the highest being in 2001!!!.
We have had drought breaking rains through Queensland and New South Wales, some say the droughts were caused by AGW and of course so was the rains which will give us bumper harvests and cattle production for many years to come. Apparently AGW can both giveth and taketh away, depending on where you live of course.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 15, 2010 4:21:27 GMT
Well here in South Australia we had an average summer March is a little cooler so far, we had a crop yield that was second highest on record the highest being in 2001!!!. We have had drought breaking rains through Queensland and New South Wales, some say the droughts were caused by AGW and of course so was the rains which will give us bumper harvests and cattle production for many years to come. Apparently AGW can both giveth and taketh away, depending on where you live of course. Everything is caused by AGW, didn't you know that?
|
|
|
Post by neilhamp on Mar 20, 2010 19:53:10 GMT
The UK Met Office claim that 2010 will be the hottest year on record. The prolonged 2009/2010 El Nino is helping so far I thought I would check out the 1998 records. So far this year 2010 is no meeting the Met Office predictions
UHA 1998 2010 Jan. 0.58 0.63 Feb. 0.76 0.62 Mar. 0.53 Apr. 0.76 May 0.65
HadCRU 1998 2010 Jan. 0.492 0.495 Feb. 0.756 0.460 Mar 0.55 Apr 0.65 May 0.60
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Mar 21, 2010 3:17:16 GMT
nautonnier: "Not a lot of food grows in the lower troposphere either ;-)" Haha, true ."So far many of these research climatologists have one thing in common - total failure to forecast next year's weather in a way a farmer (or anyone) can use. They have even been beaten completely in 'skill' (in the US) by the farmers' almanac! This is why the UK Met Office has abandoned long range forecasts - it hasn't stopped their 100 year forecasts though." Climate science is not designed to forecast weather. What it can do at the moment (with reasonable uncertainty) is tell us that the average global temperature around 2100 will be in some temperature range, and that the warming will tend to be larger at high latitudes than near the tropics.
Besides that, the uncertainties in regional models are too large to be of great use, and we can surely not forecast the weather for a certain year or so.
I have had the Enkhuizer Almanac (going back to before the history of the US) for many years, but found its weather "forecasts" not better than random. However, I have seen very few seasonal forecast perform much better. In this case, intuition and a solid knowledge of patterns and circulations might indeed give better results.
It is interesting that there is such a hole between climate models (long term averages which are usually not initialized with current observations), and short range weather models (in which the uncertainties blow up very quickly due to nonlinear interactions). It is maybe not surprizing, because it is a part of a general problem: chaos/turbulence.
The accurate forecast times increase with the scale (details) of the forecast. (small scale, short term forecast accuracy, large scale, longer forecast accuracy). It is physically well understood why this is true, but it is rather frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Mar 21, 2010 3:33:03 GMT
The UK Met Office claim that 2010 will be the hottest year on record. The prolonged 2009/2010 El Nino is helping so far I thought I would check out the 1998 records. So far this year 2010 is no meeting the Met Office predictions UHA 1998 2010 Jan. 0.58 0.63 Feb. 0.76 0.62 HadCRU 1998 2010 Jan. 0.492 0.495 Feb. 0.756 0.460 Yeah, those UAH numbers are the UAH numbers AFTER correction, and 1998 was the last year before they applied the correction. Anyway, HADCRUT is not warm, because it is missing most of the high latitudes (it has a slight population area bias), in which it was much warmer due to the negative AO. Of course this is a bit of a weak argument (even taking into account the poles, February 2010 was probably cooler than February 1998). GISS temp is relatively warm. However, how does this El Nino compare to that of 1998? Anyway, we can consider this "talking about the weather". BTW, UAH March 2010 will probably be record warm.
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Mar 21, 2010 12:59:05 GMT
The UK Met Office claim that 2010 will be the hottest year on record. The prolonged 2009/2010 El Nino is helping so far I thought I would check out the 1998 records. So far this year 2010 is no meeting the Met Office predictions UHA 1998 2010 Jan. 0.58 0.63 Feb. 0.76 0.62 HadCRU 1998 2010 Jan. 0.492 0.495 Feb. 0.756 0.460 Yeah, those UAH numbers are the UAH numbers AFTER correction, and 1998 was the last year before they applied the correction. Anyway, HADCRUT is not warm, because it is missing most of the high latitudes (it has a slight population area bias), in which it was much warmer due to the negative AO. Of course this is a bit of a weak argument (even taking into account the poles, February 2010 was probably cooler than February 1998). GISS temp is relatively warm. However, how does this El Nino compare to that of 1998? Anyway, we can consider this "talking about the weather". BTW, UAH March 2010 will probably be record warm. To respond to two of your comments at once, AJ: 1. As for AGW theory regarding warming at the pole s, how's that working out for your side down around Vostok town? And with the pesky, slowly increasing sea ice skirting Antarctica? 2. As for the temps this year, you seem to have a willingness to cherry-pick before our very eyes: warm number-busting temps are climate and anything else is weather. I guess when you're living below sea level and about to be flooded any minute the need to see a dangerous pattern ASAP can be strong. ;D
|
|
|
Post by neilhamp on Mar 21, 2010 15:41:02 GMT
aj1983 I have put in the first 5 months of the 1998 figures in my original post I agree we are only talking about weather, but it was the Met.Office who made the claim that 2010 will be the hottest year on record. That is why I thought we should compare the first few months of 2010 with the hottest year on record.
It looks like March will exceed the 1998 temperatures, but with the possible decline in the current El Nino I doubt if April/May will be as high as 1998. We can only wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Mar 21, 2010 17:20:31 GMT
Yeah, those UAH numbers are the UAH numbers AFTER correction, and 1998 was the last year before they applied the correction. Anyway, HADCRUT is not warm, because it is missing most of the high latitudes (it has a slight population area bias), in which it was much warmer due to the negative AO. Of course this is a bit of a weak argument (even taking into account the poles, February 2010 was probably cooler than February 1998). GISS temp is relatively warm. However, how does this El Nino compare to that of 1998? Anyway, we can consider this "talking about the weather". BTW, UAH March 2010 will probably be record warm. To respond to two of your comments at once, AJ: 1. As for AGW theory regarding warming at the pole s, how's that working out for your side down around Vostok town? And with the pesky, slowly increasing sea ice skirting Antarctica? 2. As for the temps this year, you seem to have a willingness to cherry-pick before our very eyes: warm number-busting temps are climate and anything else is weather. I guess when you're living below sea level and about to be flooded any minute the need to see a dangerous pattern ASAP can be strong. ;D 1) I should have been more specific: most of the warming will be in near the Arctic. In Vostok there will be very few processes which can enhance AGW there (no albedo feedbacks). There will be a lot of warming near the edges (especially the antarctic peninsula) 2) haha, do you think so? I was actually saying that the current high global anomalies can be considered weather, so recent warm temperatures -> weather. Just as our recent "cold" winter was weather, and the exceptionally high temperatures of the last two weeks. I am not contributing everything to AGW. We do need to be slightly worried about sea level rise (I'm not, at the moment btw) and recognize dangerous stormy weather well ahead. However, luckily, while temperatures have risen more than 1 C the last 40 years (that's more than is expected from AGW), the amount of storms (gales) have been drastically increasing. I do have to note that we did have a few nasty storms with dangerously (record) high tides, but I do not see anything to worry about yet (nor do I see any link with AGW), as long as we keep our d**es in good condition. This year, for example was a notably boring year as we did not have any significant gales (that can be considered exceptional). neilhamp: I agree with you. I do not know why the Met office makes such predictions. They have shown that they don't have the skills to do so with enough certainty to be credible (I haven't seen any other source who can forecast yearly global variability or seasonal forecasts for Western Europe though).
|
|