Here I present arrays of all time record low and high temperatures by state along with that record reading, and, the decade it occurred. Click on the chart to enlarge it and find your state.
Showing posts with label My Charts Analyses. Show all posts
Showing posts with label My Charts Analyses. Show all posts
Friday, December 18, 2009
DO YOU KNOW YOUR STATE'S RECORD TEMPS?
Here I present arrays of all time record low and high temperatures by state along with that record reading, and, the decade it occurred. Click on the chart to enlarge it and find your state.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
WHAT CAUSES WEATHER?
WHAT CAUSES WEATHER?
The Earth’s rotation. It’s that simple. There are many other things that affect the weather but the rotation of our planet is the largest single factor. Coming in a close second is the sun. However, without the Earth’s rotation one side of the planet would be a super-hot desolate wasteland. The other side would be a cold, barren, frigid wasteland. Period! End of story!
Why is that so? Let me give a simple explanation The Earth consists of two hemispheres, the Northern and the Southern. They are attached to each other so turn at the same speed and in the same direction (one’s just upside down to the other). So... let’s just take one half to simplify the illustration. Take the northern hemisphere and flatten it out like a record, to younger people a CD. The equator runs along the outer edge of the CD. The North Pole is at its center. Now start turning the CD or record just as it turns during its operation. As you look down upon it try to estimate the speed of the edge of our flattened Earth as it turns. Well, no need to estimate. We can figure it out easily. At the equator the circumference of the Earth is 25,000 miles. It completes one turn every twenty four hours. Doing a little division we quickly determine that a spot on the edge of the CD (Earth) is traveling at 1042 miles per hour. If you get a little nauseous on a merry go round you might not like my next thought. If you are sitting on the equator of this planet you are moving at 1,042 MPH. If you are in the mid-latitudes of the US you are moving, maybe, at only 700 MPH. The chair you are sitting in as you read this is moving at 700 MPH. The building you are sitting in is moving at 700 MPH. Weird, huh? Haven’t thought about that much? Well, what the heck does that have to do with the weather?
Well, let’s put our CD into a little plastic box and start it turning again. There is air inside the box. As the edge of the CD turns at 1,042 MPH and less towards the pole what happens to the air? What is its speed? At first, for an instant, it is zero. Friction with the surface quickly causes the air to begin moving. After a billion years or so (on Earth) the air began to move at the speed of the surface. If you are sitting in a house in the mid-latitudes the air is moving at 700 MPH. Shouldn’t your house be quickly ripped off of its foundations and shredded. Why doesn’t that happen here on Earth? The answer is that this has been going on for an awfully long time, according to scientists three billion years or longer. Surface friction eventually got the air near the surface to moving. The air higher up began to move as the air below did but at a lesser rate. Eventually, after an awfully long time, the surface air was moving much slower (in relation to the Earth) near the surface of the Earth as it is in fact ‘dragged’ along by the surface. If you look outside on a calm Summer’s day you may think there is no wind, that the air is not moving at all. In fact it is moving at 700 MPH. As are you.
Well, while all of this was happening the Sun began to have its effect. The side of the Earth towards the Sun heated up ( we call the time when the Sun is visible ‘day’). When that side rotated so that it was facing away from the Sun it cooled (we call that time ‘night’). This heating and cooling is so much of a part of our existence that we hardly think about it unless it hits some extreme. However, without the rotation of the Earth we would not be aware of this heating and cooling. On the dark side we would just know that it was awfully cold. On the exposed side we would realize that it was too hot. Likely too hot or too cold for life to exists, at least life as we know it.
Okay. The air is moving in concert with the surface of the Earth. It’s getting hotter near the equator since it most directly faces the Sun ( in the higher latitudes the Earth curves away from the Sun and hits at an angle so is not heated as effectively) and is noticeably cooler near the Poles. The winds are all parallel to each other happily moving in concert with the surface of the Earth. Why then does it get hotter in Summer and cooler in Winter? It should stay the same. Right? Well the Earth rotates on an axis and that axis is not straight up and own (in relation to the Sun). One pole of the Earth (at the tip of the axis) is always closer to the Sun than the other tip. Fortunately the Earth rotates around the Sun. At one part of the cycle the North Pole is closer to the Sun (its Summer). As it orbits 180 degrees from that position the South Pole has moved into the position where it is closer to the Sun. This effect creates our seasons. Without this tilt to the axis of the Earth seasons would be more nearly uniform.
Well, even within seasons there are variations. It will get unseasonably warm and in a couple of weeks get unseasonable cold. Sometimes these changes are minor and sometimes fairly drastic. When you watch your television or internet weather person they always give the temperature and beside it the ‘normal’ temperature. We humans like to complain about the weather. It’s too hot...or it’s too cold. How do we know what ‘too hot’ or ‘too cold’ is? Well the weather person tells us. Isn’t that good enough? After all they are the ‘experts’. Fair enough.
But how does the weather person know what is abnormally hot or abnormally cold? They take an average of the high (or low) temperatures for each date in recorded weather history and that is considered ‘normal’. Isn’t that valid? No it’s not! The reason is that weather temperature measurements have only been recorded since the late 1800s. There were no valid measurements before that time. So... what they should say is that the ‘normal high’ for this date was XYZ degrees based on an average of the last 120 years or so. What is a little disconcerting to me and one of the reasons I began this blog is that some sort of normal weather has been going on for one billion years. How can any man express an opinion on what is a ‘normal temperature when his data or observations are based on a sample of .000012% of all days or years? In what other endeavor would we DARE to express an opinion on such a small sample? None.
Whew!! Sorry! Got my dander up there a little bit. I will continue in a second on seasonal variations but first I would like to illustrate the absurdness of the sample on which global warming adherents’ arguments are based. Let’s take major league baseball as an example. A typical ball player is judged by his batting record (among other things). If we judged the competency of a major league ball player by his batting average using the same sample that global warming advocates use it would go something like this: A player has 3 ½ bats per game and will play 160 games per year or 560 at bats per year. Over a career of twenty years he would bat 11,200 times. He can get around seven pitches per at bat or a total of 78,400 pitches. If we judged his competency based on a sample of .000012% we would give him (or her) a total of 1/1000th of a pitch. How do you do that? Would the pitcher put the ball in his glove and then the sample is up? Ridiculous but no more so that the observations of global warming alarmists. I used one billion years as my base since life has FLOURISHED on this planet for that long. Let’s make the example a little shorter, say a million years. Mammals have certainly flourished during that time period. We would be judging the batter’s competency on ONE pitch. Ridiculous. Read elsewhere in this blog about The Little Ice Age and well as The Medieval Warm Period about weather over the last 1,000 years.
Why do we have such variations within seasons? Why the often quick changes to a Summer cold spell or a Winter warm spell? Why the week to week variations within each season? Well, we do not have perfect circulation with parallel air currents circling the globe. If you go back to the above of how air is moving maybe it seems that the air should follow latitudinal lines around the planet. They do not. Generally in the middle latitudes the air circulates following the pattern of a sine wave. Most of our weather follows the air circulating in the pattern. Take one part of a sine wave and you will have a ‘U’ shape. Lets put the top of the U at the top of the page (nearer the North Pole) and the bottom or closed end of the U nearer the equator. Imagine air moving from the upper left, along the wave, getting closer and closer to the equator. As it reaches the bottom of the U it suddenly veers to the northeast (at least in the Northern hemisphere) and moves away from the equator. This is a miracle of our planet. This upper level air flow takes cold air from the pole and moves it towards the equator. It takes warmer air near the equator and moves it towards the pole. The air is always being transported and mixed giving us an atmosphere which is comfortable for us to live in.
There are many other factors which affect our weather and our temperatures. Ocean currents have a similar ‘heat transfer’ effect to that just described. The Sun gets hotter or colder and the Earth follows; volcanoes throw dust into the air reflecting solar radiation back into space; clouds form and make it cooler; oceans evaporate water into the air causing clouds and other weather. The Earth’s revolutions are not symmetrical. The Earth wobbles a little on it’s axis, with the poles traveling a little closer or a little farther from the Sun, receiving radiation that is a little more direct or a little less direct. All revolutions around the Sun are not the same. Sometimes it’s a little elliptical; other times it’s nearly a circle. All of these factors and their effects on temperatures have or will be described elsewhere in this site.
However, the basic mechanism is as described above.
The Earth’s rotation. It’s that simple. There are many other things that affect the weather but the rotation of our planet is the largest single factor. Coming in a close second is the sun. However, without the Earth’s rotation one side of the planet would be a super-hot desolate wasteland. The other side would be a cold, barren, frigid wasteland. Period! End of story!
Why is that so? Let me give a simple explanation The Earth consists of two hemispheres, the Northern and the Southern. They are attached to each other so turn at the same speed and in the same direction (one’s just upside down to the other). So... let’s just take one half to simplify the illustration. Take the northern hemisphere and flatten it out like a record, to younger people a CD. The equator runs along the outer edge of the CD. The North Pole is at its center. Now start turning the CD or record just as it turns during its operation. As you look down upon it try to estimate the speed of the edge of our flattened Earth as it turns. Well, no need to estimate. We can figure it out easily. At the equator the circumference of the Earth is 25,000 miles. It completes one turn every twenty four hours. Doing a little division we quickly determine that a spot on the edge of the CD (Earth) is traveling at 1042 miles per hour. If you get a little nauseous on a merry go round you might not like my next thought. If you are sitting on the equator of this planet you are moving at 1,042 MPH. If you are in the mid-latitudes of the US you are moving, maybe, at only 700 MPH. The chair you are sitting in as you read this is moving at 700 MPH. The building you are sitting in is moving at 700 MPH. Weird, huh? Haven’t thought about that much? Well, what the heck does that have to do with the weather?
Well, let’s put our CD into a little plastic box and start it turning again. There is air inside the box. As the edge of the CD turns at 1,042 MPH and less towards the pole what happens to the air? What is its speed? At first, for an instant, it is zero. Friction with the surface quickly causes the air to begin moving. After a billion years or so (on Earth) the air began to move at the speed of the surface. If you are sitting in a house in the mid-latitudes the air is moving at 700 MPH. Shouldn’t your house be quickly ripped off of its foundations and shredded. Why doesn’t that happen here on Earth? The answer is that this has been going on for an awfully long time, according to scientists three billion years or longer. Surface friction eventually got the air near the surface to moving. The air higher up began to move as the air below did but at a lesser rate. Eventually, after an awfully long time, the surface air was moving much slower (in relation to the Earth) near the surface of the Earth as it is in fact ‘dragged’ along by the surface. If you look outside on a calm Summer’s day you may think there is no wind, that the air is not moving at all. In fact it is moving at 700 MPH. As are you.
Well, while all of this was happening the Sun began to have its effect. The side of the Earth towards the Sun heated up ( we call the time when the Sun is visible ‘day’). When that side rotated so that it was facing away from the Sun it cooled (we call that time ‘night’). This heating and cooling is so much of a part of our existence that we hardly think about it unless it hits some extreme. However, without the rotation of the Earth we would not be aware of this heating and cooling. On the dark side we would just know that it was awfully cold. On the exposed side we would realize that it was too hot. Likely too hot or too cold for life to exists, at least life as we know it.
Okay. The air is moving in concert with the surface of the Earth. It’s getting hotter near the equator since it most directly faces the Sun ( in the higher latitudes the Earth curves away from the Sun and hits at an angle so is not heated as effectively) and is noticeably cooler near the Poles. The winds are all parallel to each other happily moving in concert with the surface of the Earth. Why then does it get hotter in Summer and cooler in Winter? It should stay the same. Right? Well the Earth rotates on an axis and that axis is not straight up and own (in relation to the Sun). One pole of the Earth (at the tip of the axis) is always closer to the Sun than the other tip. Fortunately the Earth rotates around the Sun. At one part of the cycle the North Pole is closer to the Sun (its Summer). As it orbits 180 degrees from that position the South Pole has moved into the position where it is closer to the Sun. This effect creates our seasons. Without this tilt to the axis of the Earth seasons would be more nearly uniform.
Well, even within seasons there are variations. It will get unseasonably warm and in a couple of weeks get unseasonable cold. Sometimes these changes are minor and sometimes fairly drastic. When you watch your television or internet weather person they always give the temperature and beside it the ‘normal’ temperature. We humans like to complain about the weather. It’s too hot...or it’s too cold. How do we know what ‘too hot’ or ‘too cold’ is? Well the weather person tells us. Isn’t that good enough? After all they are the ‘experts’. Fair enough.
But how does the weather person know what is abnormally hot or abnormally cold? They take an average of the high (or low) temperatures for each date in recorded weather history and that is considered ‘normal’. Isn’t that valid? No it’s not! The reason is that weather temperature measurements have only been recorded since the late 1800s. There were no valid measurements before that time. So... what they should say is that the ‘normal high’ for this date was XYZ degrees based on an average of the last 120 years or so. What is a little disconcerting to me and one of the reasons I began this blog is that some sort of normal weather has been going on for one billion years. How can any man express an opinion on what is a ‘normal temperature when his data or observations are based on a sample of .000012% of all days or years? In what other endeavor would we DARE to express an opinion on such a small sample? None.
Whew!! Sorry! Got my dander up there a little bit. I will continue in a second on seasonal variations but first I would like to illustrate the absurdness of the sample on which global warming adherents’ arguments are based. Let’s take major league baseball as an example. A typical ball player is judged by his batting record (among other things). If we judged the competency of a major league ball player by his batting average using the same sample that global warming advocates use it would go something like this: A player has 3 ½ bats per game and will play 160 games per year or 560 at bats per year. Over a career of twenty years he would bat 11,200 times. He can get around seven pitches per at bat or a total of 78,400 pitches. If we judged his competency based on a sample of .000012% we would give him (or her) a total of 1/1000th of a pitch. How do you do that? Would the pitcher put the ball in his glove and then the sample is up? Ridiculous but no more so that the observations of global warming alarmists. I used one billion years as my base since life has FLOURISHED on this planet for that long. Let’s make the example a little shorter, say a million years. Mammals have certainly flourished during that time period. We would be judging the batter’s competency on ONE pitch. Ridiculous. Read elsewhere in this blog about The Little Ice Age and well as The Medieval Warm Period about weather over the last 1,000 years.
Why do we have such variations within seasons? Why the often quick changes to a Summer cold spell or a Winter warm spell? Why the week to week variations within each season? Well, we do not have perfect circulation with parallel air currents circling the globe. If you go back to the above of how air is moving maybe it seems that the air should follow latitudinal lines around the planet. They do not. Generally in the middle latitudes the air circulates following the pattern of a sine wave. Most of our weather follows the air circulating in the pattern. Take one part of a sine wave and you will have a ‘U’ shape. Lets put the top of the U at the top of the page (nearer the North Pole) and the bottom or closed end of the U nearer the equator. Imagine air moving from the upper left, along the wave, getting closer and closer to the equator. As it reaches the bottom of the U it suddenly veers to the northeast (at least in the Northern hemisphere) and moves away from the equator. This is a miracle of our planet. This upper level air flow takes cold air from the pole and moves it towards the equator. It takes warmer air near the equator and moves it towards the pole. The air is always being transported and mixed giving us an atmosphere which is comfortable for us to live in.
There are many other factors which affect our weather and our temperatures. Ocean currents have a similar ‘heat transfer’ effect to that just described. The Sun gets hotter or colder and the Earth follows; volcanoes throw dust into the air reflecting solar radiation back into space; clouds form and make it cooler; oceans evaporate water into the air causing clouds and other weather. The Earth’s revolutions are not symmetrical. The Earth wobbles a little on it’s axis, with the poles traveling a little closer or a little farther from the Sun, receiving radiation that is a little more direct or a little less direct. All revolutions around the Sun are not the same. Sometimes it’s a little elliptical; other times it’s nearly a circle. All of these factors and their effects on temperatures have or will be described elsewhere in this site.
However, the basic mechanism is as described above.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
PROBLEMS WITH NOAAS GRAPH OF GLOBAL WARMING
The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has an interesting article relating to both The Medieval Warm Period as well as The Little Ice Age. It contains a chart it says represents Global Warming today and compares it with historical data (sic). This chart is repeated in various forms in other articles. These charts are presented in such ways that the graphs are skewed to reflect a higher departure today from 'normal' temperatures than is the case. If you examine the charts they have a flat dotted line representing the mean temperature line for a calibration period. That calibration period is from 1902 to 1980 and is labeled zero meaning that is the norm and temperatures can only depart with deviations higher or lower than that 'mean' temperature. In other words a plotting for 1990 of +0.5 Celsius means that the temperature for that year was one half degree Celsius higher than the mean.
There are many problems with this presentation yet it is used over and over to present 'proof' of Global Warming and the hottest years in history. PROBLEMS:
(1.) If you follow their link to NOAA's explanation of the Little Ice Age you will read NOAA's representation that during that period worldwide temperatures were 1.0 to 1.5 degrees Celsius lower than they are today. However, when you look at the minimum low temperatures for the Little Ice Age given on the chart they were only 0.5 degrees Celsius below the mean (not 1-1.5 degrees lower). To me that means that the base line is too low. It should be moved upward around 1 degree to reflect the cooling during that period. If that happened the deviations of the late 1990s would be near zero, not plus 0.6 degrees Celsius.
(2) During the Medieval Warm Period there were not many thermomenters around so NOAA scientists have estimated the temperatures using data such as when cherry trees bloomed (how much earlier than normal) tree growth patterns, etc. However, they ignored many facts of historical significance. During the Warm Period there were wine grapes raised in England. It's still not warm enough for that today. Most of the winegrowers moved to France or Italy, warmer climes. It must have been warmer then when wine grapes grew in England yet their chart of estimates does not show that. Vikings grew crops in Greenland, a country still mostly covered by ice...so.. it must have been warmer then than now but their chart does no show that. The Vikings colonized many northern lands including sailing the famed 'Northwest Passage'. We could do that brifely today using much faster ships and shorter voyages in duration. It must have been warmer then than now. Many other scientists estimate that during the MWP temperatures were 3 degrees Celsius higher than nor. Yet on the graph prepared by NOAA the temperature deviations barely rise above the mean as defined by NOAA. It comes no where near the deviations recorded today. The base line they establish is skewed because you can't have 4 1/2 degree swing (1.5 in the Little Ice Age plus 3 degrees during the MWP) and show only a 1 degree swing (which they do). NOAA's own numbers give the 1.5 lower and the 3 degress higher yet their graph does not reflect it. We could quibble on the Little Ice Age temperatures and say they meant 1.5 degrees below today, not today's norm. However, they get caught in their misrepresentation or mistake when comparing all of these with the 3 degree increase during the MWP. You can't present part of your data one way and the rest another way. By the way I use the altenative term 'mistake' as well as misrepresentation. Can NOAA's scientists really be that stupid? That is a major flaw in their analysis and presentation.
(3.) NOAA uses the period from 1902 through 1980 as a basis for their 'mean' temperature. Logic might say that using this period when there were relatively accurate measuring devices is a good idea, and it is if discussing the Twentieth Century. However, when discussing temperatures of the last 1,000 years it is ludicrous, ridiculous, insane, and a nearly criminal distortion of the data to compare it with an arbitrary 'mean'. They set the base line for 'mean' temperature, against which they judge all others, arbitrarily with no basis in logic.
(4) In periods before 1500 most temperature records (observations that it's hot or cold; comments about early Springs; etc.) were pretty well confined to Europe with a few from Japan. This is sort of a small sample upon which to draw any conclusion. The other 9/10ths of the planet's weather was not commented on at all or if it was there were no written records left of those comments.
SUMMARY: By clicking here you can see my reproduction of what I believe to be a more fair presentation of the data. You can see that today's departure of 0.6 degrees higher from their erroneous baseline is not even close to the MWP temperatures.
There are many problems with this presentation yet it is used over and over to present 'proof' of Global Warming and the hottest years in history. PROBLEMS:
(1.) If you follow their link to NOAA's explanation of the Little Ice Age you will read NOAA's representation that during that period worldwide temperatures were 1.0 to 1.5 degrees Celsius lower than they are today. However, when you look at the minimum low temperatures for the Little Ice Age given on the chart they were only 0.5 degrees Celsius below the mean (not 1-1.5 degrees lower). To me that means that the base line is too low. It should be moved upward around 1 degree to reflect the cooling during that period. If that happened the deviations of the late 1990s would be near zero, not plus 0.6 degrees Celsius.
(2) During the Medieval Warm Period there were not many thermomenters around so NOAA scientists have estimated the temperatures using data such as when cherry trees bloomed (how much earlier than normal) tree growth patterns, etc. However, they ignored many facts of historical significance. During the Warm Period there were wine grapes raised in England. It's still not warm enough for that today. Most of the winegrowers moved to France or Italy, warmer climes. It must have been warmer then when wine grapes grew in England yet their chart of estimates does not show that. Vikings grew crops in Greenland, a country still mostly covered by ice...so.. it must have been warmer then than now but their chart does no show that. The Vikings colonized many northern lands including sailing the famed 'Northwest Passage'. We could do that brifely today using much faster ships and shorter voyages in duration. It must have been warmer then than now. Many other scientists estimate that during the MWP temperatures were 3 degrees Celsius higher than nor. Yet on the graph prepared by NOAA the temperature deviations barely rise above the mean as defined by NOAA. It comes no where near the deviations recorded today. The base line they establish is skewed because you can't have 4 1/2 degree swing (1.5 in the Little Ice Age plus 3 degrees during the MWP) and show only a 1 degree swing (which they do). NOAA's own numbers give the 1.5 lower and the 3 degress higher yet their graph does not reflect it. We could quibble on the Little Ice Age temperatures and say they meant 1.5 degrees below today, not today's norm. However, they get caught in their misrepresentation or mistake when comparing all of these with the 3 degree increase during the MWP. You can't present part of your data one way and the rest another way. By the way I use the altenative term 'mistake' as well as misrepresentation. Can NOAA's scientists really be that stupid? That is a major flaw in their analysis and presentation.
(3.) NOAA uses the period from 1902 through 1980 as a basis for their 'mean' temperature. Logic might say that using this period when there were relatively accurate measuring devices is a good idea, and it is if discussing the Twentieth Century. However, when discussing temperatures of the last 1,000 years it is ludicrous, ridiculous, insane, and a nearly criminal distortion of the data to compare it with an arbitrary 'mean'. They set the base line for 'mean' temperature, against which they judge all others, arbitrarily with no basis in logic.
(4) In periods before 1500 most temperature records (observations that it's hot or cold; comments about early Springs; etc.) were pretty well confined to Europe with a few from Japan. This is sort of a small sample upon which to draw any conclusion. The other 9/10ths of the planet's weather was not commented on at all or if it was there were no written records left of those comments.
SUMMARY: By clicking here you can see my reproduction of what I believe to be a more fair presentation of the data. You can see that today's departure of 0.6 degrees higher from their erroneous baseline is not even close to the MWP temperatures.
Monday, February 9, 2009
RECORD HIGH/LOW TEMPERATURES USA
There are several problems with methodology in making any statement about record high or low temperatures. (1) A measurement must be taken of 'world' temperatures, not just one locale or even one continent; (2) The National Weather Service in the US has only taken and recorded temperature readings since the 1880s. This is a very small time period to make any judgment as to trends. The Earth has obviously been warming since the last Ice Age 12,000 years ago, so how can we use temperature patterns or trends for 114 years (up to the year of Our Lord 1999) to make any conclusion? (3) Errors may be made in data collection. Instruments can become poorly calibrated, the personnel doing the reading can be having a bad day, or, as in one instance in Russia, simply be lazy or below budget or hung over and repeat the readings taken in September and use them again for October's numbers. However, the 'Greens' use the last 114 years as 'proof' so let's concentrate on that time period. Also, a major high pressure system which might produce record temperatures does not simply dissolve and end. It moves across and around the hemi-sphere. A storm system, for example, can produce violent weather in North America and then be traced once it moves on to the same effects in Europe, then on to Asia. For the sake of argument let's assume that record high or low temperatures were caused in the US by systems which moved on and produced similar effects elsewhere in the hemi-sphere. The numbers below are taken from the National Climatic Data Center for the US. It tracks how many new record all time high or all time low temperatures were set within the fifty states for each decade. For example, in the 1920s two states had all time record high temperatures. In the 1960s there were three states which recorded record all time low temperatures during that decade. In other words, in the sixties three states had temperatures which were the coldest ever recorded in those three states. These temperatures were not necessarily recorded in the same year, just within the same decade. I chose that unit of measurement to simplify and summarize the results.
...................# OF RECORDS ...............# OF RECORDS
....................SET FOR HIGH ................SET FOR LOW
DECADE ......TEMPERATURES.............TEMPERATURES
1880s ..........................1...................................0....
1890s ..........................2...................................5....
1900s ..........................1...................................5....
1910s ..........................5...................................3....
1920s ..........................2...................................1....
1930s ........................25..................................10....
1940s ..........................0...................................4....
1950s ..........................4...................................2....
1960s ..........................1...................................3....
1970s ..........................2...................................4....
1980s ..........................2...................................6....
1990s ..........................5...................................7....
From the numbers presented it appears obvious that the 1930s was the 'hottest' decade on record with half of the states recording record all time high temperatures. However, a significant number of record low temperatures were also recorded. Another point of interest is that from 1940 through 1999 there were 26 record all time low temperatures recorded while only 14 record all time high temperatures were recorded. Can we say that Global Cooling was occuring during these decades? No. We cannot say that. Only by analyzing temperatures all over the world, in both hemi-spheres on an hour by hour basis and deriving an hourly average temperature can we make that assumption. However, it is likely that a large portion of US temperatures followed closely in trends to these record highs and record lows. Many 'Greens' ignore these historical temperatures and have instead hysterically stated that it was growing warmer during the 1940s through 1999. Not so. In a stable atmosphere it might be safe to say that record highs and record lows would have a fairly even distribution over the 130 years of data. Except for the 1930s that seems to be the case. Of course in the 1930s we had a high number of record highs and a high number of record lows. Something was going on in the atmosphere during that decade but we cannot say what. We would have to research the upper air long wave patterns to learn more about this and then to determine what caused the long wave patterns to be distorted. It is normal that there would be record 'highs' and record 'lows' since there were no measurements before.
...................# OF RECORDS ...............# OF RECORDS
....................SET FOR HIGH ................SET FOR LOW
DECADE ......TEMPERATURES.............TEMPERATURES
1880s ..........................1...................................0....
1890s ..........................2...................................5....
1900s ..........................1...................................5....
1910s ..........................5...................................3....
1920s ..........................2...................................1....
1930s ........................25..................................10....
1940s ..........................0...................................4....
1950s ..........................4...................................2....
1960s ..........................1...................................3....
1970s ..........................2...................................4....
1980s ..........................2...................................6....
1990s ..........................5...................................7....
From the numbers presented it appears obvious that the 1930s was the 'hottest' decade on record with half of the states recording record all time high temperatures. However, a significant number of record low temperatures were also recorded. Another point of interest is that from 1940 through 1999 there were 26 record all time low temperatures recorded while only 14 record all time high temperatures were recorded. Can we say that Global Cooling was occuring during these decades? No. We cannot say that. Only by analyzing temperatures all over the world, in both hemi-spheres on an hour by hour basis and deriving an hourly average temperature can we make that assumption. However, it is likely that a large portion of US temperatures followed closely in trends to these record highs and record lows. Many 'Greens' ignore these historical temperatures and have instead hysterically stated that it was growing warmer during the 1940s through 1999. Not so. In a stable atmosphere it might be safe to say that record highs and record lows would have a fairly even distribution over the 130 years of data. Except for the 1930s that seems to be the case. Of course in the 1930s we had a high number of record highs and a high number of record lows. Something was going on in the atmosphere during that decade but we cannot say what. We would have to research the upper air long wave patterns to learn more about this and then to determine what caused the long wave patterns to be distorted. It is normal that there would be record 'highs' and record 'lows' since there were no measurements before.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
