on a lowell mass street 1/12/11
taken off hampshire street lowell mass our streets are buried in snow we have 24-36" of snow we had unsafe intersecting roads every where un safe driving also large buildings with flat roofs are unsafe many colapsed buildings
a brilliant mid-Winter's day..blue skies and sunshine on the clear ice of the brooks creating wonderful images..
Can you tell how many cars are under all that? We had a whopping 2 plus FEET of snow today and the snow drifts were upwards of 3 and 4 feet. Gotta love winter.
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 — Blog Index
Again, I say to you to plug it into a spreadsheet yourself if you have doubts. There is no other way for me to confirm my graph unless you're willing to do the work and confirm it yourself.
And, an unverified source certainly is not what NASA is.
Considering most of 2011 may end up running below normal globally, it will be interesting to see if he continues to draw attention to it monthly.
But the troposphere still has a ways to fall to catch up, especially if this La Nina persists through the summer, unlike the 2008 La Nina. We'll see.
Left: Global. 2nd from Left: Northern Hemisphere. 2nd from Right: Southern Hemisphere. Right: Tropics.
That is their format
But you didn't even attempt to verify it.
Lol. Ok.
Take it up with NASA. Email them asking for labels on every page. The format is the same as in the README file, as they intended. Ask them.
.001C
Sarcasm Flag: ON
Oh, it looks like you're about 18 months behind the times; the whole manufactured "Climategate" thing has been proven to be nothing more than a desperate witch-hunt by the contrarian community. You should catch up.
Issued at 01:37 JST 14 Jan 2011
Occurred at (JST) Latitude
(degree) Longitude
(degree) Depth Magnitude Region Name
01:17 JST 14 Jan 2011 20.7S 168.7E 7.3 Southern Pacific Ocean
--
5 hours ago near Vanuatu and New Caledonia.
Tropical Cyclone Advisory #16
TROPICAL CYCLONE VANIA (03F)
6:00 AM FST January 14 2011
=====================================
At 18:00 PM UTC, Tropical Cyclone Vania, Category Two(978 hPa) located at 21.1S 167.7E has 10 minute sustained winds of 50 knots and is reported as moving south southwest at 4 knots. Position FAIR based on multispectral infrared/enhanced infrared radar imagery with animation and peripheral surface observations.
Storm Force Winds
==================
50 NM from the center
Gale Force Winds
=================
210 NM from the center in the sector from north through east to southwest
within 150 NM elsewhere
Additional Information
=======================
Overall organization decreased slightly in the past 24 hours. Outflow good to east and south but restricted elsewhere. Cyclone lies under a 250 HPA diffluent region with moderate shear. CIMSS indicates increasing shear along forecast track. Sea surface temperature is around 29C. System currently steered by a weak northerly deep layer mean regime.
Dvorak assessment based on 0.90 wrap yielding DT=3.5, MET=3.5, PT=3.5. Final Dvorak T number based on DT.
Dvorak Intensity: T3.5/3.5/S0.0/24HRS.
Most global models eventually move the cyclone south.
Forecast and Intensity:
========================
12 HRS: 22.0S 167.6E - 50 knots (CAT 2)
24 HRS: 23.5S 168.0E - 50 knots (CAT 2)
48 HRS: 27.7S 167.9E - 35 knots (CAT 1)
The next tropical cyclone advisory from Fiji Meteorological Services will be issued at around 2:00 AM UTC..
Flattering.
Obviously cooling from one La Nina won't just continue down a slope forever. La Ninas naturally flip back to El Ninos every time. What will be interesting is to see if we bottom out as low or lower than 2008, which bottomed out as low as the previous La Nina in 1999-2001.
Today the Earth warms up and cools down in 100,000- year cycles. Geologic history reveals similar cycles were operative during the Carboniferous Period. Warming episodes caused by the periodic favorable coincidence of solar maximums and the cyclic variations of Earth's orbit around the sun are responsible for our warm but temporary interglacial vacation from the Pleistocene Ice Age, a cold period in Earth's recent past which began about 2 million years ago and ended (at least temporarily) about 10,000 years ago. And just as our current world has warmed, and our atmosphere has increased in moisture and CO2 since the glaciers began retreating 18,000 years ago, so the Carboniferous Ice Age witnessed brief periods of warming and CO2-enrichment.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=scientists-seek-climate-clues
If you have access
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/12/23/1014798108
Dr. Masters is an honest and open scientist; I'm sure that if the planet somehow mysteriously cools off to below normal for the year, he'll mention it. That's what scientists do, no?
But, at least for the US, cooling isn't in the forecast. The CPC says the Southwest and Alaska should be above normal for most of the year, the West should have a hot summer, Florida should be above average into fall, the northeast should be warm in the fall, and the upper Midwest should be toasty next winter. Only the Pacific northwest is expected to be below normal, and then only through spring. Bottom line: if the CPC is correct, 2011 will be yet another warmer than average year for the United States:
Click for larger image:
Folks...please beware of this silly claim of his.
****************
For example...
"Scientists involved in last year's "climategate" leaked emails controversy, which added to scepticism about the science of global warming, were not open enough with their data and unhelpful with requests for information, an independent review of the affair found yesterday.
They and their institution, the University of East Anglia (UEA), did not embrace the "spirit of openness" enshrined in the Freedom of Information Act, according to a long-awaited report into their conduct carried out by a panel of senior academics."
And this...
"We do find that there has been a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness, both on the part of CRU scientists and on the part of the UEA," the report, commissioned by UEA, said.
It also criticised the CRU scientists for failing to include proper labels on a 1999 graph prepared for the World Meteorological Organisation, which was the subject of an infamous email about Jones using a "trick" to "hide the decline". The panel said the result was misleading, though they accepted this was not deliberate as the necessary caveats had been included in the report text."
****************
Such clearly unethical behavior on the part of those scientists and their cohorts is the reason why so many people are finding themselves siding against the obvious fraud of AGW.
Maybe they need to add a little more 'Ethics Training' to the program in those schools.
The AAAS article mentioned did not address anything that suggested the scientists were absolved. It tap danced itself silly instead.
When oh when will the lies end.
Oh well, looks like today is not the day.
When will it end?
When it's more profitable to proclaim "Global Cooling", that's when.
Climate Model Indications and the Observed Climate
Global climate models clearly show the effect of human-induced changes on global temperatures. The blue band shows how global temperatures would have changed due to natural forces only (without human influence). The pink band shows model projections of the effects of human and natural forces combined. The black line shows actual observed global average temperatures. The close match between the black line and the pink band indicates that observed warming over the last half-century cannot be explained by natural factors alone, and is instead caused primarily by human factors.
Simulated global temperature in experiments that include human influences (pink line), and model experiments that included only natural factors (blue line). The black line is observed temperature change.
We shall see won't we. They completely missed the summer forecast for 2010, and they had Alaska boiling hot for this winter, yet we are suffering from well-below normal temperatures. We'll see. Climate forecasters still have major issues dealing with 3-month periods or longer.
The thing that kills me most on this blog (and most other places where you see global warming debates) is how unprofessional and poorly the anti man made global warming side presents themselves.
Just flame flame flame, with a hint of spam. Oh and don't forget to call everything a scam.
Get some evidence for once. Look at all of MichaelSTL's posts, they're filled with EVIDENCE. Something you folk have trouble finding (GEE I WONDER WHY).
http://www.commonwealthfoundation.org/policyblog/detail/mann-from-transparency-champion-to-bully-vi ctim
Yes, Virginia, you do have to produce those 'Global Warming' documents
Over the last 800,000 years, natural factors have caused the atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration to vary within a range of about 170 to 300 parts per million (ppm). The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by roughly 35 percent since the start of the industrial revolution. Globally, over the past several decades, about 80 percent of human-induced CO2 emissions came from the burning of fossil fuels, while about 20 percent resulted from deforestation and associated agricultural practices.
In the absence of strong control measures, emissions projected for this century would result in the CO2 concentration increasing to a level that is roughly 2 to 3 times the highest level occurring over the glacial-interglacial era that spans the last 800,000 or more years.
Carbon dioxide concentration (parts per million) for the last 800,000 years, measured from trapped bubbles of air in an Antarctic ice core. More information: Climate Change Impacts on the U.S.
All that graph proves is the level of CO2 in the atmosphere does not follow the temperature level of our earth.
HOWEVER, that does not disprove the fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and does contribute to the warmth of our planet.
The funny thing is, the negative AO is now being blamed for the reduced arctic sea ice extent, when the climate projections say a positive AO will accomplish that. Furthermore, a negative AO results in a colder arctic (where the polar easterlies dominate) than a positive AO. The reason it isn't doing so during the last two years is because both major ocean multidecadal cycles (PDO and AMO) have been mostly positive in recent history, shoving lots of warm water into the high latitudes which has stalled sea ice growth, though it has not yet dipped lower than the 2007 record 30-year low.
University of Illinois IPCC Arctic GCM Scenarios
NOAA ESRL - NCEP Reanalysis
Yes, we're laughing that it's been proven that climate cycles over hundreds of thousands of years and everyone is upset about .1 C warmer than average.
PS The sky is falling.
Viewing: 201 - 251
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 — Blog Index