backtop


Print 31 comment(s) - last by woody1.. on Aug 29 at 5:30 PM


  (Source: NOAA)
The first seven months of 2012 (January to July) were also the warmest of any on record since 1895

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists have found that July 2012 was the hottest month in the history of U.S. climate records.
 
The NOAA's National Climatic Data Center reported that the average temperature for the contiguous U.S. during the month of July 2012 was 77.6 degrees Fahrenheit, which is about 3.3 degrees higher than the 20th century average. This means that this was both the hottest July and hottest month in the history of U.S. climate record-keeping, which began in 1895. 
 
According to the report, the warm July temperatures occurred mainly throughout the Midwest, the Plains and the Eastern Seaboard. In July 2012, Virginia experienced its hottest July ever while seven states recorded the month as their second hottest July and another 32 states had it land in their top 10 hottest Julys. 
 
The last warmest July was July 1936, which experienced an average U.S. temperature of 77.4 degrees Fahrenheit. 
 
July 2012 affected agriculture poorly, with the contiguous U.S. average of precipitation at 2.57 inches, which is 0.19 inch below average. The May to July period was the second warmest in history and the 12th driest. 
 
The first seven months of 2012 (January to July) were the warmest of any on record since 1895. The national temperature was 56.4 degrees Fahrenheit, which is 4.3 degrees above the long-term average. The first seven months were ranked the 15th driest January-July period too.
 
The year to date (August 2011-July 2012) was the warmest year on record with the nationally averaged temperature at 56.1 degrees Fahrenheit (3.3 degrees above the long-term average). The last record was broken during the July 2011-June 2012 period. 

Source: Science Daily



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

*grabs popcorn
By kattanna on 8/9/2012 3:20:34 PM , Rating: 5
boy.. this thread should devolve quickly

better get 2 bags cooking

;>)




RE: *grabs popcorn
By geddarkstorm on 8/9/2012 3:32:29 PM , Rating: 3
It's funny, because according to the U.S. Climate Reference Network http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/programoverview.html , which is the highest quality stations being deployed by NOAA to replace the old crappy ones, this July average was only 75.5 F. A whole 2.1 degrees F cooler than what NOAA is trying to report here.

So, why go with the bad data when you have known best quality data covering the entire country? I guess that's for others to decide.

More on USCRN http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/docs.html and the data http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/qcdatasets.html


RE: *grabs popcorn
By chromal on 8/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: *grabs popcorn
By geddarkstorm on 8/9/2012 3:40:46 PM , Rating: 4
The USCRN didn't exist in the 1930's. It's a new development to fix the issues of the deterioration of the old network, which is to the point where the old network's reliability is heading down to be lower than a quarter a century ago (check out the first link on USCRN and why NOAA says we need it).

The point is, July was hot, sure, but our fancy new, super good stations say it wasn't nearly as hot as they are trying to claim using our known bad, and increasingly deteriorating, network. It wasn't a record, which is also in agreement with the satellites.

So why did NOAA not mention at all its new, super spiffy network we've been paying for?


RE: *grabs popcorn
By chromal on 8/9/2012 3:44:38 PM , Rating: 1
God knows, the old air-port based METAR reporting system had its flaws, but maybe the new system doesn't sample in locales that were as hot. Still, I'm curious if the new network of stations recorded (for it) record temperatures this July, or not. The specific number isn't important.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By geddarkstorm on 8/9/2012 4:01:18 PM , Rating: 2
The last link I gave goes to the corrected data, so you can take a look yourself, if you are up to it.

Just browsing through and doing a peek at Stillwater, OK, shows last year's July was hotter by about 1-2 C; and OK was one of the heavily affected regions this summer. Charlottesville, VA shows that this July average was exactly the same (25.7 C) as last year's, and VA supposedly has the greatest anomaly for this past July; according to the NOAA chart.

That's just two stations though, so if you want a clear picture, gotta do all the stations for all their monthlies (ignoring Alaska and Hawaii, as this is continental US only).


RE: *grabs popcorn
By chromal on 8/9/2012 4:05:34 PM , Rating: 2
Nah, NOAA does pretty good work. I'll just take their word for it. :) FWIW, I set a record temperature on my little home weather station, but my records only go back to 2008. ;) 84'F at my home, located at 8700ft elevation, West of Denver, CO.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By Spuke on 8/9/2012 4:39:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I set a record temperature on my little home weather station
Same here. It was 112F/44C, 2500 ft elevation. My records only go back to 2010 though. :)


RE: *grabs popcorn
By wookie1 on 8/9/2012 7:49:43 PM , Rating: 2
Don't worry, most people are willing to just take the news headline from the "experts". Fortunately, a few dig into the reports to find out more details, and it certainly isn't clear that it was the warmest July. IT turns out that the temperature in 1936 depends on when you look at the temperature record. A few years ago, 1936 was hotter than it is now (at least in NOAA's adjusted data). I recommend reading wattsupwiththat.com to get more info, whether you agree with it or not there is a good amount of background information.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By kattanna on 8/9/2012 3:50:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes, you're right, it was a cool July. The heat we felt was psychosomatic


actually for us here in los angeles, it has been a VERY cool summer until this week. We have had days of low 70's being the high of the day. its been unusually cool, and I'm not complaining.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By Spuke on 8/9/2012 4:42:59 PM , Rating: 2
We're normal up here in the high desert north of you. I think we tied a record or two last month. Definitely warmer overall than the last two years (a bit below normal) though.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By ShaolinSoccer on 8/10/2012 7:30:18 AM , Rating: 2
It's been cooler here in South Carolina, too. Compared to the rest of the country. *knocks on wood*


RE: *grabs popcorn
By BillyBatson on 8/13/2012 3:42:47 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah I agree I'm in the san fernando valley and until this week it's the coolest summer I can remember and last year wasn't bad either. Growing up here 20 years ago it used to get hot by may now it's August.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By wookie1 on 8/10/2012 12:12:07 PM , Rating: 2
NEWS FLASH: JULY IS NORMALLY HOT! The question is whether it is the hottest July experienced by the US.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By 0ldman on 8/11/2012 11:39:26 PM , Rating: 2
The heat felt over the entire south east was due to a tropical storm that was barely worth mentioning stalling out every front 300+ miles out. Very little air movement coupled with high humidity, does it every time.

It isn't like it is the first time this has happened.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By Uncle on 8/10/2012 8:43:26 PM , Rating: 2
Had to jump in. Any updated info of the Dirty Thirties. Some say anywhere from 6 to 10 yrs depending where you lived. They were keeping records then so what were some of those numbers in comparisons vs today. Personally, were just going through a cycle. I read some where that their was another heat wave in the 16 or 17 century hotter then now and their was no Industrial revolution at the time so co2 is out of the question. I believe most of this is fear mongering to benefit certain segments of industry. Were the only province in Canada paying 6.7% carbon tax on gasoline. Hows that for a gimmick, much easier to con the people then say were going to raise your income tax. Every time our provincial government says their lowering our income tax, recycling tax, environment tax , etc, goes up more then the drop in income tax. Our population just seems to swallows it whole.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By geddarkstorm on 8/9/2012 3:34:38 PM , Rating: 2
Also, I love this quote from NOAA on the USCRN page:

quote:
One of the principal conclusions of the 1997 Conference on the World Climate Research Programme was that the global capacity to observe the Earth's climate system is inadequate and deteriorating worldwide and "without action to reverse this decline and develop the GCOS, the ability to characterize climate change and variations over the next 25 years will be even less than during the past quarter century"


Welp.


RE: *grabs popcorn
By wookie1 on 8/10/2012 12:14:43 PM , Rating: 3
It's a bit ironic that in order to beg for more money they have to admit that the existing temperature measurement system is inadequate. So if the existing system is inadequate, how can they state with any confidence that last month was the hottest July by a fraction of a degree? It seems like a Catch-22 for them.


Please no more crap science
By Tony Swash on 8/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Please no more crap science
By Schmide on 8/9/2012 7:48:42 PM , Rating: 1
Looked at the Dude's spreadsheet. He seems to be averaging the monthly max vs the monthly min and declaring that the average.

Kind of like if I had a bunch of temperatures.

30 30 30 30 27 23

His average 25.5

Actual average 28.3

I still can't upvote or downvote!!!!!!!!!!


RE: Please no more crap science
By maugrimtr on 8/10/2012 10:02:45 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, but using a weighted average calculation resembles what real scientists may do. We can't have that - the scientists would win if we ever admitted that they might know what they are doing.


RE: Please no more crap science
By dgingerich on 8/10/2012 11:28:17 AM , Rating: 3
Well, given that scientists these days have to get through modern liberal indoctrination known as the modern university system before they're allowed to be scientists, I'd say they're lacking some credibility right from the start. They start with a liberal presumption before they ever start practicing what is known as science these days. It colors all of their conclusions.

On top of that, they're using records that only go back 117 years to proclaim that this is a first, when human history shows we had higher sea levels and no ice caps at least three times, in just the last 3500. We didn't all drown back then, so why would the ice caps melting now do that to us? The warmer temperatures back then allowed us to grow more food and spread out, avoiding disease. Why would this be a problem now?


RE: Please no more crap science
By mindless1 on 8/10/2012 12:34:11 PM , Rating: 2
It would be a problem now because we have the inventions of titled property, national boundaries, a larger population, political agendas, disparity in income/mobility, etc.

We could already grow more food if we chose to except that market manipulation makes it unprofitable. As food prices rise it becomes more profitable again.

FWIW, my garden crops this year are doing better than ever BUT I have the luxury of being able to water them, and the higher water bill to go along with it.


RE: Please no more crap science
By woody1 on 8/29/2012 5:30:13 PM , Rating: 2
It's the Teavangelicals who have subverted science because of politics and religion. If more people had a "liberal" education, we wouldn't have the current situation where only 15% of the US population believe in evolution. The US is falling behind in science because of the popularity of religion-based pseudo-science.

As far as "we didn't all drown back then", the world population was a tiny fraction of what it is now when these events happened previously. Do you have some indication of what the effects were on populations at that time


So what you're saying is.....
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 8/9/2012 3:36:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The NOAA's National Climatic Data Center reported that the average temperature for the contiguous U.S. during the month of July 2012 was 77.6 degrees Fahrenheit...... The last warmest July was July 1936, which experienced an average U.S. temperature of 77.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

So what your saying is.... the temperature is still 77 degrees on average in July!!!




RE: So what you're saying is.....
By talikarni on 8/9/2012 3:48:03 PM , Rating: 1
The thing I question is just how accurate was the equipment before 1990? Especially in 1936, for all we know the mercury or person reading them had bad eyes causing false records....


By wookie1 on 8/10/2012 12:22:32 PM , Rating: 2
Well, mostly the same equipment is in use now for these measurements. Some of the problems are that measurement stations have been added or moved - and in locations such as the middle of a parking lot, next to A/C units on rooftops, next to BBQ grills, and next to runways at airports.

Check out surfacestations.org for a survey of the climate monitoring network. The vast majority of the stations would have accuracy worse than 2 degrees C, which is 3.6 degrees F.

Many of the stations were once outside a city, but have been enveloped as the city grew, and the average temperature has risen over the years due to the urban heat island effect.


By Akerans on 8/9/2012 10:41:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So what your saying is.... the temperature is still 77 degrees on average in July!!!


No, what they said was that the average temperature for July is 74.3, and that July 1939 and July 2012 are the hottest two July's on record.


Copy and Paste
By Denigrate on 8/9/2012 4:24:48 PM , Rating: 2
Sad the state of copy/paste for articles around here.




Duh.....!
By Ammohunt on 8/9/2012 10:26:49 PM , Rating: 2
two words....Solar maximum live it, learn it, love it




Key note:
By dgingerich on 8/10/2012 11:19:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
on record since 1895


That's pretty short records compared to all of human existence. 117 years of records of temperature compared to 3500 years of other human records that show that we had higher sea levels, lack of ice caps, and hotter weather three times in our past.

Yeah, this is lacking a little credibility.




"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki