NYC'S COLDEST AUGUST DAY...

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperNYC'S COLDEST AUGUST DAY...You've joined us then ?

QuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeQuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperNYC'S COLDEST AUGUST DAY...You've joined us then ?as you saidQuoteLucky they didn't have global warming those days, it would have been even hotter !!

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperQuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeQuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperNYC'S COLDEST AUGUST DAY...You've joined us then ?as you saidQuoteLucky they didn't have global warming those days, it would have been even hotter !!"Global warming", "climate change", "extreme weather", "increased radiative forcing", it's all the same (thing) - increased CO2 in the atmosphere due to manmade emissions from the burning of fossil fuels has given rise to more heat being trapped in the atmosphere and therefore more extreme weather events (due to greater energy available).read this ppauper.

Re: NYC's coldest August day and a standard contrarian fallacy This was an unusual but non-extreme weather fluctuation. The contrarian fallacy consists of listing spatially local and temporally isolated cold weather fluctuation factoids, with the goal of leaping to the fallacious generalization that global warming is not occurring. The unusually cold air mass has come down from Canada, colliding with the moisture from the remnants of Tropical Storm Erin. "The good news is the cold air is not going to stick around. We'll get back to more seasonal levels later this week and we may even sneak a few more final hot weekends of the summer," Cali said. Temperatures are expected to climb back into the upper 80s by Friday.Ref:http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_stor ... ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by: JWDRe: NYC's coldest August day and a standard contrarian fallacyThis was an unusual but non-extreme weather fluctuationI see. When it's the "hottest" xyz, that's an extreme weather event.When it's the "coldest" xyz, that's an "unusual but non-extreme" weather eventThankyou for clarifying for us

IMO, extreme events could be classified by being outliers for one or more of three attributes:1. Intensity2. Spatial scales (extent - widespread vs local in area)3. Temporal scales (duration - long vs short time period)Naturally we can have cold as well as hot temperature outliers. Global warming implies that we should increasingly see hot temperature outliers, because there is more energy provided to the weather system due to global warming. In any case, the existence of global warming is NOT dependent on the existence of outliers. Global warming, defined as the upward time trend of the global spatial average temperature during the last 30 years, exists because the observations tell us so; see the graph. RealClimate.org just (8/10/07) posted a discussion of McIntyre’s findings, transmitted to GISS. The problem was a data inconsistency that lowered by -0.15 degree C the average US temperature after 2000, along with an exchange of the hottest year in the US from 1998 to 1934, whose temperature difference is however statistically insignificant. The conclusions of the observation of global warming remain. The updated global average temperature graph is shown below, showing the characteristic increase in observed global average temperature over the last 30 years. While the contrarian blogs had a field day, the bottom line from RealClimate.org was: Another week, another ado over nothing. Ref: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graph ... ----------

How now, Brown Cow?

QuoteOriginally posted by: HamiltonHow now, Brown Cow?See, the graph is going up Hamlton. Even you should be able to tell us this. If not, I'll get a five year old to do so.

QuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeQuoteOriginally posted by: HamiltonHow now, Brown Cow?See, the graph is going up Hamlton. Even you should be able to tell us this. If not, I'll get a five year old to do so.Since I am a mere mortal -- and not a Mensan intellect like yourself -- I note several things when first looking at a time series graph. My first job is to open up Edward Tufte's reference works, and occasionally Mr. Tukey's and ask a question about the time scale. Is it long enough? Second, from where were the measurements derived? Third, to what else does this correlate with?If you were to correlate washing machine sales and cancer rates from the 1940's to the 1990's you could surely draw the inference that washing machines cause cancer.And, of course, I like to ask about the Medieval Warming Period since, for Gaian earth-worshippers, the Medieval period gets them so globally heated. Perhaps its because of the uncomfortable similarity between selling Carbon offset credits and selling Papal Indulgences.Then, I close by looking at a closeup picture of the Challenger shuttle exploding as a way of reminding myself of the last time NASA gave people reassurance about warm vs cool temperatures at launch time.

QuoteOriginally posted by: HamiltonQuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeQuoteOriginally posted by: HamiltonHow now, Brown Cow?See, the graph is going up Hamlton. Even you should be able to tell us this. If not, I'll get a five year old to do so.Since I am a mere mortal -- and not a Mensan intellect like yourself -- I note several things when first looking at a time series graph. My first job is to open up Edward Tufte's reference works, and occasionally Mr. Tukey's and ask a question about the time scale. Is it long enough? Second, from where were the measurements derived? Third, to what else does this correlate with?If you were to correlate washing machine sales and cancer rates from the 1940's to the 1990's you could surely draw the inference that washing machines cause cancer.And, of course, I like to ask about the Medieval Warming Period since, for Gaian earth-worshippers, the Medieval period gets them so globally heated. Perhaps its because of the uncomfortable similarity between selling Carbon offset credits and selling Papal Indulgences.Then, I close by looking at a closeup picture of the Challenger shuttle exploding as a way of reminding myself of the last time NASA gave people reassurance about warm vs cool temperatures at launch time.The graph is going UP !!! Just say it. Just like a hockey stick. And what have you got against NASA ? Did they turn you down for a job - maybe they're not so interested in philosophers in getting them to the moon and back!

The graph is going UP !!! Just say it. Just like a hockey stick. And what have you got against NASA ? Did they turn you down for a job - maybe they're not so interested in philosophers in getting them to the moon and back!Its Sunday morning, and the Dogma of the Immaculate Calculation is on full display under the Revivalist Hot Air tent.Peace be upon you.

From a study by a NASA research CLIMATE REALIST scientist, here is yet another bad potential consequence of global warming: increased severity of storms, tornadoes, and fires caused by lightening because more energy is available for the weather system. Severe weather is in NASA scientists' forecast Global warming will make typical events such as thunderstorms more dangerous.From the Associated PressAugust 31, 2007WASHINGTON – As the world warms, the United States will face more severe thunderstorms with deadly lightning, damaging hail and the potential for stronger tornadoes, a study by NASA scientists suggests.While other research has warned of large-scale weather changes, such as more extreme hurricanes and droughts, the new study predicts that even smaller events like thunderstorms will be more dangerous because of global warming.The basic ingredients for severe U.S. inland storms are likely to be more plentiful in a warmer, moister world, said lead author Tony Del Genio, a NASA research scientist."The strongest thunderstorms, the strongest severe storms and tornadoes are likely to happen more often and be stronger," Del Genio said Thursday at his office at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. The paper he co-wrote was published online in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.Other scientists caution that this area of climate research is too difficult and new for this study to be definitive. But some upcoming studies also point in the same direction.With a computer model, Del Genio explored an area that most climate scientists have avoided. Simple thunderstorms are too small for the massive models of the world's climate. So Del Genio looked at the forces that combine to make thunderstorms.A unique combination of geography and weather patterns already makes the United States the world's hottest spot for tornadoes and severe storms in spring and summer. The large land mass that warms on hot days, the contours of the atmosphere's jet stream, the wind coming off the Rocky Mountains and warm moist air coming up from the Gulf of Mexico all combine.Del Genio's computer model shows global warming will cause more strong updrafts, which occur when the wind moves up and down instead of sideways."The consequences of stronger updrafts are more lightning and bigger hail," he said.On a normal sunny day, updrafts are less than 1 mph. In a big rainstorm, they're about 2 mph. In a severe storm they could be 20 to 30 mph. The faster that updraft, the worse the storms.The Southeast and Midwest lie in the path of most of the worst of these storms.However, the new study also forecasts danger for the Western United States. It predicts lightning will increase about 6% as the amount of carbon dioxide -- the chief global warming gas -- doubles.Previous studies have shown that the West will get drier, making it a tinderbox for more wildfires. This study shows that there will be more matches in the form of lightning strikes to start those fires, Del Genio said.Other pending and recent research, especially from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, point in the same general direction, said several scientists who weren't involved in Del Genio's study. But they pointed out that research in this area is so new that the NASA study is not the final word."It's certainly a plausible result," said Leo Donner, a climate modeling scientist at NOAA's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton, N.J. Donner earlier this year came out with a study predicting more heavy rain as temperatures rise.Harold Brooks, a top scientist at NOAA's severe storms laboratory in Norman, Okla., has soon-to-be-published studies finding results similar to the new NASA study, especially when it comes to hail. Some of the severe hail that should be increasing could be baseball-size and come down at 100 mph, "falling like a major league fastball," he said.Ref: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... ?track=rss http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070830/ap_ ... F---------

Record Cold in Chicago

One day’s “record cold” in one city is not an extreme weather event, and has no trend consequence. Indeed, from the Windy City’s weather report just quoted above: Updated: 3:50 am CDT on September 15, 2007 we have this forecast:TuesdayMostly sunny...windy and unseasonably warm. Highs in the upper 80s.Bottom Line: Small, local, temporary weather fluctuations like a record cold day in Chicago have NOTHING TO DO with the fact that global warming exists. Ref:http://www.wunderground.com/US/IL/Chica ... click=big2 -------