Cold over much of the U.S.

October 9th, 2012 at 2:01 am by under Bill's Blog, Weather

  Click the graphic or click here to enlarge.  Much of the country has been shivering this week.  There were 1,128 record low minimum or record low maximum temperatures in the lower 48 states in the first 8 days of October.  Some of the lows were extraordinary.  Oklahoma City had their earliest freeze ever on Sunday.  Records there go back to 1891.  Abilene Texas had a high of 49 on Sunday (average high 80).  They were 30 degrees colder on Sunday than on last New Year’s Eve!  It got all the way down to 24 at San Angelo, Texas.  The highs for Saturday and Sunday were 48 and 47 at Amarillo (average high 75).  The high of 53 in Dallas compared to an average high of 82.    High temperatures Monday held only in the 60s at Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo and Victoria Texas.  Other high temperatures Monday:  60 Monroe LA, 62 Tupelo MS, 51 Nashville TN, 52 Charlotte NC, 55 Rome GA, 48 Pittsburgh and Lynchburg VA.   At the other end of the country, Meacham OR had a record low of 19.   Spencer IA had a low of 13 and Sioux City, IA hit 15.   Some high temperatures in Minnesota and Montana held in the low 40s.       Grand Rapids was 2 degrees cooler than average for the first 8 days of October and we have had exactly average temperatures since August 1.   Last year it was quite warm at this time…with highs from 78 to 82 from Oct. 5-11th.  The cooler temperatures this year have pushed the fall color change a few days ahead of last year.  I think temperatures moderate back to normal or a degree or two above for next week, then turn colder again (with perhaps some snow) for a period around the last week of Oct. into the first week of Nov.  Lake Michigan is still at 60 degrees (and pretty choppy today with Gale Warnings out).

Heavy rain fell at Ft. Lauderdale FL again Monday.  They had another 2.72″ Monday, bringing the 8-day October total to 6.13″.  They’ve had 40.82″ of rain since 6/1.  Miami has had 83.04″ of rain this year so far…that’s nearly 31″ more than average.

And this from NASA “The coldest spot on the globe in September was (again) at the South Pole, where the Antarctic spring temperature averaged 3.31 C (almost 6 degrees Fahrenheit) colder than normal.   The Antarctic icecap was at a historic maximum extent in September.  You can see the Antarctic icecap is much bigger than the historical average and significantly bigger than last year at this time.

24 Responses to “Cold over much of the U.S.”

  1. Vincent(N.E.Kent CO) says:

    Yes last year was warmer. I built a wood box in my garage that holds a cord, and i wrote on it that Oct 8th and 9th it was sunny and 81° both days. So it is a tad cooler this Oct so far. I still have not used the furnace or wood stove yet. I like to tough it out as long as i can. 61° inside and 44.2° out now. PERFECT!!

    1. GunLakeDeb says:

      *I* could handle the cold temps like that (indoors) – but my Hubby is a wuss. LOL!!!

  2. Ryan (Rockford) says:

    That global warming, I mean “climate change”, must be causing all of these record cold temperatures. And I know someone, if not several people, will come on board and say something about how one week of cold air over one small portion of the globe doesn’t say much about long-term climate. I wholeheartedly agree…..but for some reason, it seems that when there is record heat for a small period of time over a small portion of the planet, all we hear about is global warming, climate change, and so forth. And how if we cut back on emissions, we can correct this alleged catastrophe. Cutting back on emissions is a desirable goal, no question about it. But to think that it will somehow cure the planet of this evil climate change is a fantasy that may come true as often as a broken clock is correct.

    1. Brian(Grandville) says:

      Spot on Ryan.

  3. Scott (west olive) says:

    Holy cow, Global cooling is occuring! I need some funding to study it. Couple Mill should be good. :) I’ll just stand in the U.P. till it snows and validate it’s getting cold. Ok I’ll only need 1 Mill.

    1. Scott (west olive) says:

      and no I don’t think GW is true.

      1. joanne says:

        Scott,
        Every credible scientist that studies climate agrees that the Earth is Warming. Before attempting to parrot what Bill says, you need to pay more attention. Bill agrees that GW is real. However, he is arguing cause. Bill is being forced to side with corporations in the misconception that GW is cyclical and can’t possibly be affected by Humans. So before making such an obviously uneducated statement, try doing some of your own research. Here is a link to give you scientific facts of GW and the effects on the Earth. Take a few minutes to read with an open mind. BTW, this is not FOX news or Rush so you may be surprised what you learn.
        http://www.edf.org/climate/global-warming-facts

        1. Bill Steffen says:

          The data CLEARLY shows that global temperatures have leveled off over the past decade: http://suyts.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/image_thumb5.png?w=580&h=325 (GISS DATA) and http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/trend-24.png (HadCrut DATA).

          Prof Judith Curry said, the BEST project’s research data show there has been no increase in world temperatures since the end of the Nineties – a fact confirmed by a new analysis that The Mail on Sunday has obtained.

          ‘There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.”

        2. Bill Steffen says:

          That’s a heckuva URL. The graph that you linked to (on someone’s personal website) does not identify the temperature data used for the graph and it appears to have stopped about 2005. My links use GISS and HadCrut data.

          As I have written before…there is no such thing as static climate. Climate is always changing…the Earth clearly warmed from the late 1970s to at least the late 1990s (and probably until at least 2002)…global temperatures have been fairly steady for the past decade…carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas (albeit less important than water vapor) and increasing CO2 should cause at least a little warming…a warming climate would have both negative and positive consequences…other factors are significant players, including urbanization, land use, solar variability (note the cooling that coincided with the Dalton and Maunder Minimums), ocean currents and volcanoes. There is ample evidence that the warming has slowed significantly (globally) or stopped…current conditions do not warrant “skyrocketing” utility rates on the middle class/lower class (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNSZ62xiD4M …”they will pass that money along to consumers”) or taxing gasoline to $9 a gallon, as our Energy Secretary proposed (http://sec.online.wsj.com/article/SB122904040307499791.html). Neither of these “solutions” would budge global temperature 1/10th of one degree, but would cause severe economic consequences to the U.S. economy and the family budget.

        3. joanne says:

          What do you think putting a worshiper of a religion with a strong history of racism will do for our country into the White House? Here is a quote from Brigham Young.

          Brigham Young second President and Prophet:

          You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. . . . Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which was the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another cursed is pronounced upon the same race–that they should be the “servants of servants;” and they will be until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree (Journal of Discourses, 7:290; emphasis added)

          Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be (ibid., 10:110; emphasis added)

        4. Bill Steffen says:

          Your religious bigotry will turn off the vast majority of people on this blog and elsewhere. Brigham Young’s not running for President. He died in 1877 – nearly a century and a half ago.

  4. Resourceful Nana says:

    It’s curious that Bill didn’t mention the Arctic Ice Cap. I believe it was at a historic low last month. Since it occurs largely over water (as opposed to over a continent as in the Antarctic), the feedback loop fuels the loss of ice. I’m sure it will re-appear as we move into winter in the northern hemisphere. But it probably won’t reach the average thickness of past decades/centuries. Thin ice disappears more rapidly than thick ice. We’ll see what happens next summer.

    1. Bill Steffen says:

      Given the $$$ implications…the Arctic ice loss has had lots of publicity, while there has been virtually no mention of the Antarctic. There has been a lot of talk about polar bears (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/healthy-polar-bear-count-confounds-doomsayers/article2392523/), but not manatees (http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/region_tampa/unprecedented-number-manatees-die-from-cold-this-year).

      Look at this long term trend of the Arctic: http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.arctic.png

      And now this plot of the long term trend of the Antarctic: http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png

      Note how when one goes up, the other goes down (see 2007 and 2012), and the general trend for 25 years has been for Arctic ice extent to decrease and Antarctic ice extent to increase. Note the Arctic ice extent graphed next to the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation): http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/arctic-ice-compared-to-amo/

  5. Resourceful Nana says:

    “Lots of publicity” regarding the loss of ice in the arctic does not necessarily mean that those reading this blog are aware. Many are also not likely aware that Richard A. Muller, University of California physicist and a long-standing skeptic about global warming has now concluded–from his team’s new analysis– “that global warming is real and …humans are almost entirely the cause.” (recent New York Times editorial at http://goo.gl/S2aPz)
    Check out the work of Lester Brown, founder of the Earth Policy Institute. An interesting article appears in the Oct/Now 2012 issue of Mother Earth News with enlightening ideas about renewable energy and how quickly we can switch a large percentage of our energy needs to renewable sources. I was amazed. Probably rozy, but why not promote it?

    1. Bill Steffen says:

      I doubt that Richard Muller, Lester Brown or pretty much anyone in the mainstream press has mentioned the Antarctic ice (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/). It doesn’t fit the product that they are trying to sell.

      Not only are there several quotes from Dr. Muller from previous years which show he really wasn’t a skeptic (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/27/nature-pans-best-and-muller-pr-antics-prints-letter-from-dr-singer/), but members of his own team (the BEST Group) dispute what he has said:

      Professor Dr. Judith Curry (of the BEST GROUP): Prof Curry said, the project’s research data show there has been no increase in world temperatures since the end of the Nineties – a fact confirmed by a new analysis that The Mail on Sunday has obtained.

      ‘There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’

      Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2055191/Scientists-said-climate-change-sceptics-proved-wrong-accused-hiding-truth-colleague.html#ixzz28x2DswyR
      Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

      Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2055191/Scientists-said-climate-change-sceptics-proved-wrong-accused-hiding-truth-colleague.html#ixzz28x1wY0TV

      1. Resourceful Nana says:

        I agree there should be more news about the climate including south pole ice. However, I find your summary to be drastically weak and misleading. A statement without the scientific rationale. There seem to be numerous sources and recent articles explaining such things as the arctic has been losing 4% of it’s sea ice per decade while the antarctic has been gaining 1% per decade. Put another way, the arctic has been losing an estimated 30,000 miles per year (at low ice), while the antarctic has been gaining approx. 5,000 miles per year (at peak ice). Further research led to the explanation that global warming has led to increased winds at the south pole that have an impact on the way ice develops/spreads.
        I haven’t found scientific support for Prof. Curry’s statements that you shared. I found one rebuttal that couldn’t quite understand what she was trying to say (too much of her piece contradicted other parts). I did read a Daily Mail piece that included the belief that the increase in south pole ice was a part of climate change bolstered by warming on other parts of the globe. I also read “Fact Checker by Mark Robison.” The summary answer was “NO” to the question, “Does Record Antarctic Sea Ice Refute Global Warming?” Too much detail to share here.

        1. Bill Steffen says:

          The alarmists are working backwards. It’s the political narrative, the grant $$$, the drive to see $9 a gallon gasoline and “skyrocketing utility rates” that supersedes objectivity. That’s why they had to “use Mike’s trick to hide the decline”. That’s why they worked hard to eliminate the Medieval Warm Period. That’s why they have the convoluted “adjusted temperatures”. That’s why where was a concerted effort to circumnavigate Freedom of Information laws and to deny free speech rights to those with differing points of view (see Climategate). That’s why the “politics of personal destruction” is evident as giants in the climate field like Dr. Reid Bryson (who said on CNBC that “you could spit and cause more damage to the environment than doubling CO2 in the atmosphere”) and Dr. William Gray have been called the nastiest of names by political hacks with no background in climate science. There’s too much money involved…too many carbon-producing trips to warm places to regurgitate the story to a complicit and uninformed press.

          I linked to both the GISS and HadCrut data that clearly show that global temperatures have leveled off in the past decade. The weak solar cycle and the inevitable switch of the AMO to cold phase (most scientists estimate that’s about 5-10 years away) would suggest that global temperatures will stay steady to even drop a bit in the next couple decades.

        2. big Daddy BC says:

          It’s the deniers who are working backward. Revenue depends on climate change NOT being real. You continually talk about adjusted temperatures and then use the adjusted average temperature to make points about the climate not changing. The no-name scientists that you continually quote are notably on the fringe. Every major scientific organization on Earth publishes support for the climate change model. EVERY ONE! The only support you can gather is from blogs like Watts Up. We have NOAA, NASA, Berkeley, Hadru, Cryosat, the Japanese Met. Assoc., the World Met Assoc., the EPA, IPCC, the Catholic Church, and literally every thinking person on Earth. You have right-wing media and dudes on blogs. LOL Sad but true, my friend.

        3. big Daddy BC says:

          BTW, really enjoyed watching the VP hand Eddy Munster his butt last night. Most entertaining thing I’ve seen in a while. ;)

        4. Bill Steffen says:

          You would have enjoyed that debate. It was meant to fire up the base. Overall, it didn’t help: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/11/cnn-poll-on-debate-winner-ryan-48-biden-44/ AP’s poll showed Ryan 51% and Biden 43%. Biden was a nicer version of you…interrupting, arrogant – several blatant lies (like you saying the Romney was a polygamist)(http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/330237/bidens-frequent-falsifications-medicare-and-tax-reform-avik-roy). He continued to lie about Libya and that thoroughly discredited video that no one has seen. They need to bring Susan Rice up and put her under oath to find out who told her to go out and give false testimony about the killing of our Ambassador. . Polls show that he didn’t win any points with independents and women: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/330247/women-biden-was-jerk-debate-katrina-trinko

          The latest polls are not looking good for you: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

        5. big Daddy BC says:

          http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

          Thanks for the link. It puts Obama way ahead. Holy smokes, he’s 7 points up on a Rasmussen poll in Michigan! That’s huge!!!

          BTW, your insults are exactly what you’re accusing me of. Irony?

        6. Bill Steffen says:

          Check the polls again! Wow! Gallup has Romney up by 6 points…and Michigan’s gone from solid Obama to leaning Obama to now toss-up! http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections/ Polls show Romney up in Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Missouri and even New Hampshire! I’ll have to split screen the Monday debate and the Lions/Bears game.

Leave a Reply