It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Record low temperatures in 46 states during June

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 08:44 AM
reply to post by Essan

Right on.

I also want you to look through something if you have the time.

Salt Lake City Climate Graphs

I went as far back as it would allow me, which is 2001. I know my local area is a blip on the radar in terms of the size of this earth, but it is surprising how steady it is, even though the local news even brings up "climate change" when we really are reversing our role through a drought and making record rainfalls.

I wonder if we could get a few people to check out their areas and see if they come up with any extreme anomolies that show GW in action or maybe not. Maybe we can get a little consensus going of our own.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:14 AM
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

For crying out loud if you want to pass as being "partly intelligent" learn how to spell please...

Anyway, as I am sure I have explained several times already, if we were undergoing WARMING, we shouldn't be seeing RECORD LOWS...

Not to mention the fact that winter has lasted longer, mostly on the northern hemisphere.

uhmm... first of all, you can try and make me feel bad about my spelling all you want, but it still doesn't mean your not completely contradicting yourself.

What do record lows have to do with global cooling? we see record highs too... you see the backwards logic? Local climates experience great and SPARATIC(yep.. spelled it wrong) change depending on a great number of factors. Im not sure if your familiar with "climate change," but it entails a shift that could bring colder temperates to normally warm places and vice-versa. Again, being cold this year has nothing to do with long-term climate change.

BS, there have been Climate Changes that have occurred within a decade, and even in a few years in the past. There is not such thing as your half baked claim that "the climate will cool and heat SPORADICALLY with an extremely general trend of over hundreds of thousands of years depending on the shift"... In the past 15,000 years the climate has changed about 30-40 times at least...

well, wrong again! im not sure if you have ever looked at a climate chart... but they go something like this:
temperatures go up and down in extreamly random ways for short periods of time. up and down up and down colder warmer colder warmer. But slowly, over the course of many years, the line of best fit(representing the GENERAL LONG TERM TREND) will rise or fall depending on the direction of global climate change. At the moment, for the past 100 years anyway, the trend is an upwards one at the moment. here you go(to prove all my points concerning sparatic short term change and general long-term change:

Did i say anywhere in my OP I knew exactly in which direction the climate was moving?.....

I have said it several times in the past, it all depends mainly on what the Sun's activity will be, but it also depends on Earth's magnetic field, and it also depends on whether we are entering a new region of the LIC (Local Interstellar Cloud) which could very well be the reason for all the Climate Changes that all other planets, and even Moons with an atmosphere in our Solar System have been experiencing...

I posted the fact that there are RECORD LOWS, which if there was actually any WARMING, there shouldn't be any RECORD LOWS, but hey, I can spell it out for you if you want.

...same argument regurgitated to look nice? once again... local record lows are nothing to eat your hat over. They happen, i would know as i actually live in a cold climate. We get record lows here in Canada too. and, record highs. and even record less days. just because we have a normal temperate year doesn't mean climate change is stabilizing and all is well. Your argument is empty, with record lows holding no water in an actual argument regarding climate change.

You are actually part of a species? Damn, I feel sorry for them...

You can once again put both feet in your mouth now.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:17 AM
San Antonio, TX

The information cited in this article come from Potential Climate Deterioration in Semiarid Semitropical South Texas and, boiled down, says:

"Temperature and rainfall means calculated for the twentieth century indicated no shift away from these properties, although it was found that annual temperature averages were rising nearly every year at the century’s end. The climate of South Texas was found to be likely to be even more problematic in the years 2025, 2050 and 2100 than it is at present, due to projected annual rainfall averages near those of the present coupled with mean annual temperatures higher by ~4 oC."

This means that temperature trends in South Texas were rising nearly every single year, and the total rain output was maintaining, which means we are hotter and hotter without getting more rain.

so, yes, we ARE getting hotter.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:25 AM
reply to post by Lannock

yep, thats true. cold temperatures are a function of any change, cooling or heating. If the world were cooling, we would still be experiencing record highs... just in different places.

not everything works in a straight line, as OP will have you beleive

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:29 AM
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

lol. if the planet was cooling there would be no record lows? common man, think here. Record lows for the month of june... could be 12 degrees. wouldn't be that unlikely, its happened here in Canada before. lots. just because the world is heating up by a fraction of a fraction of a degree every so often doesn't mean we wont still have high and low temperature extreams for our extremely incomplete climate history graphs.

are you disinfo?

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:36 AM

Originally posted by Lannock

Originally posted by Kevin_X2
i dont think one summer, or one part of the world, justifies deeming our world a "cooling" planet. In fact, i dont think any number of temperature readings short of a thousand years should determine any fluctuation in temperature.

we know nothing, and assume everything. Which makes an @ss out of you and me

I'm in Cape Town, South Africa and I'm experiencing my coldest winter ever (I'm 41). I'm sure I read somewhere that record low temps could also somehow be attributed to "Global warming". Maybe it should be called "Global temperature fluctuations".


I wanted to read something like that!!

if the idea that a lower level of sunspots will cause a global cooling and if this effect causes the jet stream to presist, in the northern hemisphere, to presist to remain in a kind of "winter pattern" due to the lack of higher summer temperatures in the higher altitudes over the tropics that force that jet stream northwards; this Effect will almost certainly also have the winter to be much colder in the southern lattitudes too, at the same time!!


i wonder how Australia is doing?

I note that there are ALWAYS sunspots, even during the minimum period.
two to five, maybe, anytime anyone peers through a scope, at the sun.
Apparently, now, there are basicly no sunspots at all.

the Sky and Telescope mag writes about how unintuitive the spots seem at affect the sun's heat output: more sunspots make the sun hotter, there is more radiation.
Thus that little ice age during 150 years of no sunspots during the middle ages.

which MEANS, people, that if this "no sunspots" exists much longer, we all will have a very very cold winter, this winter, in the Northern
hemisphere!! Maybe the less heat output will counterbalance the global warming.

I wonder if there are any sites that follow the daily number of sunspots, like there are for earthquakes? That magizine's article is months old, I wonder if there are any sunspots TODAY?
Does anyone know of such a site?!

Yes, time to get the winter clothes ready and to learn to enjoy COLD!
Colder winters and summers that never ever really arrive and maybe the glaciers will all begin to grow again!


posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:36 AM
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

your reply to essan was very offensive. you take this really personally, don't you? nobody is saying anything about man-mad global warming. your making that all up in your head. we are all like-minded here in the sense that we know deception when we see it.

but then we see you ranting and trolling about global cooling! if you don't believe in man made global warming, fine. but... don't ignore all the evidence that points to a natural warming trend. You keep yourself in ignorance because you don't like global warming, then you realize that your feet are cold and so... the only logical explanation is global cooling!

jeepers kreepers

...oh, and if your only argument is against my spelling mistakes then you need more straws to grasp at.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:44 AM
One cool summer isn't indicative of a lack of global warming then it is of an ice age. It is that. One cool summer.

Global warming coolin gor anything else is about averages, over long periods of time. Not one summer.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:44 AM

IF CO2 was to blame for the WARMING, then we shouldn't see any COOLING. How hard is that to understand?

Very hard, actually. so hard that you don't even understand it.

What, exactly, leads you to believe this? if you can explain your logic in a scientifically viable way then i will believe you. even if CO2 was responsible (which it probably isn't) we would still see local climate temperature lows. Climates dont just start running up the heat bill or turn on the AC. there are so many factors that any "cooling" in any number of places could be a result of an arctic wind making its way down to the equator by some miracle of passage.

back to the chart... climate will change sparatically in the short term and generally within the long term... making for all kinds of highs and lows in any given place.

...still waiting for some sort of factual viable proof for your argument... other then "some places are experiencing record lows."

if thats all, then "some places are experiencing record highs". so ying and yang are in balance

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 09:50 AM
reply to post by nixie_nox

Are you talking to me? because I was talking about the last decade in my local area with graphed information by the government that I posted so you could verify it for yourselves.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 10:02 AM
reply to post by MagoSA

I don't understand. That's not what the NOAA indicates. According to the PDF file, 1933 was South Texas' hottest year average for the past 120 years.

San Antonio/Austin Average Annual Temperatures

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:02 AM
Another thread on climate change.

Sometimes I really don't know which side of the fence I should jump in.

Will I eventually realise that global warming has little to do with man-maid carbon emissions, and this whole push for action on "climate change" is really about the elite wanting to enforce further control over society?

Will I discovery that man-made emissions have had a large impact on the warming of our planet and if continued without changing our ways will likely result in catastrophic consequences?

I think I'll let my legs dangle on each side for a while.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:09 AM
BTW, it can't possibly be an ice age, considering we are in a glacial recession. It cycles every 100,000 minorly. 400,000 majorly. The last one was 10k. Years ago. So we got another 90k before anyone can claim ice age or glacial advance. And since these cycles are based on the Earth's movement, there shouldn't be any sudden change.

the milankovitch cycles

If CO2 is not man made, and is part of a natural cycle, what made the CO2? volcanic activity has been quite stable for a long long time now.

If a very important greenhouse gas does not affect the Earth's cycle, then how can it not affect the Earth's cycle naturally?

If it is just natural cycles, then what is causing the Earth to destablize suddenly? What is the driving factor? Isn't the Sun is constant. Or as others like to point out, we haven't studied it enough to know its patterns. It could do this every 100 years. If that is the case, it would show up in the geographic record. Exactly how are sunspots affecting the climate? Can anyone actually explain this?
Sunspot acitivty is constantly measured and it never has more then a 2% variance short term. Not nearly enough to affect Earth's Climate. Long term is not even 1%.

Since the Earth's magnetic fileds and solar winds protect us from any activity, increases do not change the planets climate.Decreases do not change the Planets climate. If increases affect the planet's climate, we have much bigger problems to worry about then GW.

Sunspot activity as being related to climate was a popular idea in the 19th century. If that gives you any indication of how valid it is.

IN fact, solar spot activity has been low for 12 years. So if the cooling is based on minimal sunspot activity, we would not have broken heat records only a few years ago.

Back to the ice age thing. Studies have shown that carbon follows the planet warming up after an ice age, not the cause of it. it is a result of warming oceans and melting glaciers release the carbon dioxide, so it gives a warming boost. But only for about 800 years or so afterwards. Maybe a few thousand, but not ten. Fact is, the Earth should be in a stabilized climate right now, not warming, not cooling.

So you can't claim that the Earth is not warming up because glaciers and ice packs are forming, because they are the ones that release the CO2. So if they are freezing, technicallly the CO2 levels shoudl be dropping, not rising.

And any part of the planets natural cycles take a very long time to happen. Millenia, centuries. Not decades.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:23 AM
Nobody was around keeping records the last time the polar ice caps shrank and the snow started disapearing off the mountaintops. If it was the other way around and the ice caps were getting bigger and the snow was staying on the mountains they would be telling us another ice age was coming and jacking up the price to heat our homes.

I like it when the weatherman or the newspaper mentions it hasn't been this hot or cold in awhile and "We almost broke that record set back in 1955." Nobody panicked back then so why now? Maybe not enough T.V.s to spread the fear. Maybe the real cause of global warming is people noticed that "Hole in the ozone" wasn't having any affect on them so TPTB thought up something new to keep us worried.

I live in Michigans thumb area and it feels about 60 outside. (Lots of overcast too, my favorite kind of day.)

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 12:11 PM
mabey the equator is moving? that would explain warmer temperatures on the north and south poles and cooler temperatures at the existing equator.

Just one of a million things that could cause temperatures to go up and down

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 12:11 PM
BTW, have no fear. Temps will start to turn normal by the end of the month. All of the coolness is a jet stream that doesn't want to be evicted, stringing along a lot fo cool fronts.

In fact, next year is looking pretty warm....

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 01:29 PM
Changes in local temperature are not indications of change in global climate, and if somebody is arguing they are from the anti-AGW side - shame on you.

For God sakes man, don't you remember? Back when global temperatures were rising, and even after they started to flat line that "just look out your backdoor argument", was the one that used to drive us crazy. How do you get through that kind of mistaken reasoning, we used to ask.

Things like snow in Saudi Arabia, or the livestock freezing to death in China in the winter of 2007, are only worth calling attention to in response to the frequent claims from the other side such events matter, when talking about warming. Even Obama was using the floods in, I think it was North Dakota, as evidence of global warming. They weren't. You can't make that point if you're going to say, "the record low in June in Poughkeepsie (if there was one) Matters"

Actually the thing which correlates best to radical, regional, weather variations is ocean changes (oscillations, El Nino, La Nina).

Another problem with arguing regional variations as proof of climate trends is it muddies the waters, as far as the argument short term trends of say ten or more years matter.

I think they do matter. For one thing the one were in right now - no statistically significant warming for the last 15 years, flat-lining since 1997, cooling since 2002 - wasn't supposed to happen according to the theory outlined by the IPCC, and others.

IPCC global temperature projections versus actual temperatures

James Hansen's for3cast for coming global temps in 1988 versus what actually happened was also incorrect.

If you look at a graph of what happened in the last 150 years or so, it wasn't a consistent rise. It was two 30 year trends which leveled out (step funtions). 90 of those 150 years there was no warming.

So even though you can see this current short term trend were in of flat-lining, or cooling, as being dissolved into a long term trend of warming, you can also see it as cause to wonder what's going to happen next.

Also if you cut away the BS, the global warming hysteria is really about a short term spike in temps from 1978 to 1998 - 20 years. Without that there is no argument.

[edit on 7-7-2009 by Ntity]

[edit on 7-7-2009 by Ntity]

[edit on 7-7-2009 by Ntity]

[edit on 7-7-2009 by Ntity]

[edit on 7-7-2009 by Ntity]

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 01:33 PM
Hey have you guys seen this one, where you can...

Plot your own trends.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 02:15 PM
Sacramento has been much cooler than usual. I actually felt cold on July 5th. Very strange. Will be going back to Iwaki soon, where the sister in law says things are normal.

posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 08:00 PM
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues

I don't get it either. Theses researchers pulled from NOAA data to make their conclusions, and that seems at odds with other data.

I think that the difficulty is like what was happening with smokers - for every study saying one thing, there was another stating the opposite.

At this point, all I can say is that we have two blessed days of rain and less than a hundred for the first time all month.

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in