Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-30-2009, 02:26 PM
 
3,153 posts, read 3,593,793 times
Reputation: 1080

Advertisements

Annual Weather Summary: November 2009 to October 2010

Winter will be colder than normal, on average, especially north of the Chesapeake Bay. The coldest periods will occur in early to mid- and late January and mid-February. While precipitation will be below normal, slightly above-normal snowfall will occur in many parts of the region. Watch for snow around Thanksgiving, with other snowy periods in mid-January and mid- and late February.
April and May will be warmer and drier than normal, with water reservoirs running low.
Summer will be cooler and drier than normal, with a drought possible despite heavy rain in early June from a tropical storm. The hottest periods will be in mid-June, mid-July, and early to mid-August.



Farmers Almanac not predicting the end of the world this summer... Temps going up and down..what a nightmare that is..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-30-2009, 02:42 PM
 
Location: The Great State of Texas, Finally!
5,476 posts, read 12,244,635 times
Reputation: 2825
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdavid002 View Post
Annual Weather Summary: November 2009 to October 2010

Winter will be colder than normal, on average, especially north of the Chesapeake Bay. The coldest periods will occur in early to mid- and late January and mid-February. While precipitation will be below normal, slightly above-normal snowfall will occur in many parts of the region. Watch for snow around Thanksgiving, with other snowy periods in mid-January and mid- and late February.
April and May will be warmer and drier than normal, with water reservoirs running low.
Summer will be cooler and drier than normal, with a drought possible despite heavy rain in early June from a tropical storm. The hottest periods will be in mid-June, mid-July, and early to mid-August.



Farmers Almanac not predicting the end of the world this summer... Temps going up and down..what a nightmare that is..
LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,065,889 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd View Post
IPCC and NOAA have moved on? Like how NOAA wont use satalite data to record surface temp? Like that?

instead they realy on a subset of land based urban recording locations all known to have serious issues with heat Island effect?

and the East Anglia output is still used. It has not been set aside. there may be other methodologies but their data collection was the starting point and is still used by IPCC.

We just cant validate the accuracy because the data sets are "missing"
Today there are about a dozen independent data sets of historical temperature. Take your pick, they all give consistent answers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 02:47 PM
 
3,153 posts, read 3,593,793 times
Reputation: 1080
I think these guys were holding the thermometer by the wrong end....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Over Yonder
3,923 posts, read 3,646,342 times
Reputation: 3969
Quote:
Originally posted by Huckleberry3911948

america hard right has found a cost effective way to deal with global warming, denial.

Actually, many of us have come to understand that global warming and cooling are processes which the earth has undergone for well, ever. We also realize that while humans are polluters, and do release poisonous gases into the atmosphere, the one they have decided to cite as our major pollutant, CO2, is a gas which is produced mostly by natural processes, not human beings. I believe the number was something like 95% of the CO2 in our atmosphere is created by the ocean. Leading one to believe that the earth's changes are due to the earth's natural processes, not the dreaded human race. We are ravagers of the land, destroyers of natural beauty, but nature is tenacious and quickly takes back the grounds that are not kept thoroughly in check. And our climate changes are a direct result of natural reactions of the planet and the gases and elements it natural emits into the atmosphere. And, all recent evidence has begun to point towards a period of global cooling currently taking place, not global warming. So I'd say people have plenty of reason too ask questions and doubt the official story we've been fed by our government and agencies affiliated with our government.

You have to see that these people are not fighting to save you, they are fighting to enslave you. And if not enslave you, atleast profit from your attempt to be a more planet friendly human being. Take the recycling movement for example. There was a time when things like bottles and cans could be recycled, and you would receive a small amount of money in exchange for your troubles. But corporations didn't much like the part about giving out money, so they took steps to eventually make recycling a requirement. This way, they receive loads of reusable materials at no cost to them other than shipping, which helps them make even more profit, and we collect and return the materials for free because we have to.

Now nobody said doing little things like this for your planet was a bad thing. Far from it. I have no problem with reusing materials to help ease the sapping of natural resources. But I believe the savings these companies gain from using recyled material should be passed onto the consumer since they no longer pay you for your service. And that just doesn't happen folks. We pay more and more while they get tighter and tighter on recyling laws which enable them to collect even more reusable resources for their products. And all in the name of saving the planet. These people are profiting from this new "save the planet" industry and that is not fair to the people who are actually doing the work to help ease the pollution of our planet. The people on top of this entire deal are not in it to help us, they are in it for the money and the control.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 03:06 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,065,889 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdavid002 View Post
Annual Weather Summary: November 2009 to October 2010

Winter will be colder than normal, on average, especially north of the Chesapeake Bay. The coldest periods will occur in early to mid- and late January and mid-February. While precipitation will be below normal, slightly above-normal snowfall will occur in many parts of the region. Watch for snow around Thanksgiving, with other snowy periods in mid-January and mid- and late February.
April and May will be warmer and drier than normal, with water reservoirs running low.
Summer will be cooler and drier than normal, with a drought possible despite heavy rain in early June from a tropical storm. The hottest periods will be in mid-June, mid-July, and early to mid-August.



Farmers Almanac not predicting the end of the world this summer... Temps going up and down..what a nightmare that is..
Brilliant it will be cold in January.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 03:26 PM
 
20,458 posts, read 12,379,585 times
Reputation: 10251
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Today there are about a dozen independent data sets of historical temperature. Take your pick, they all give consistent answers.
Yep and taking a close look at the dozen or so data sets, you will find an interesting comonaliity.

Names like Mann, Briffa, and Jones seem to pop up in all the papers.


I do not find it shocking that the same small group of people can come up with data that reinforces their earlier results.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,065,889 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd View Post
Yep and taking a close look at the dozen or so data sets, you will find an interesting comonaliity.

Names like Mann, Briffa, and Jones seem to pop up in all the papers.


I do not find it shocking that the same small group of people can come up with data that reinforces their earlier results.
Generate you own data set and subject it to peer review. LOL

Here's a list and yeah the experts in their field do pop up. Not so much people like Michaels. There's a reason. He has nothing original to say.

  1. P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). , The Holocene, 8: 455-471. doi:10.1191/095968398667194956
  2. M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). , Geophysical Research Letters, 26(6): 759-762.
  3. Crowley and Lowery (2000). , Ambio, 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). , Science, 289: 270-277. doi:10.1126/science.289.5477.270
  4. K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). , J. Geophys. Res., 106: 2929-2941.
  5. J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). , Science, 295(5563): 2250-2253. doi:10.1126/science.1066208.
  6. M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). , Geophysical Research Letters, 30(15): 1820. doi:10.1029/2003GL017814.
  7. P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). , Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. doi:10.1029/2003RG000143
  8. S. Huang (2004). , Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. doi:10.1029/2004GL019781
  9. A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). , Nature, 443: 613-617. doi:10.1038/nature03265
  10. J.H. Oerlemans (2005). , Science, 308: 675-677. doi:10.1126/science.1107046
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 04:23 PM
 
20,458 posts, read 12,379,585 times
Reputation: 10251
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Generate you own data set and subject it to peer review. LOL

Here's a list and yeah the experts in their field do pop up. Not so much people like Michaels. There's a reason. He has nothing original to say.

  1. P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). , The Holocene, 8: 455-471. doi:10.1191/095968398667194956
  2. M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). , Geophysical Research Letters, 26(6): 759-762.
  3. Crowley and Lowery (2000). , Ambio, 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). , Science, 289: 270-277. doi:10.1126/science.289.5477.270
  4. K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). , J. Geophys. Res., 106: 2929-2941.
  5. J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). , Science, 295(5563): 2250-2253. doi:10.1126/science.1066208.
  6. M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). , Geophysical Research Letters, 30(15): 1820. doi:10.1029/2003GL017814.
  7. P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). , Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. doi:10.1029/2003RG000143
  8. S. Huang (2004). , Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. doi:10.1029/2004GL019781
  9. A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). , Nature, 443: 613-617. doi:10.1038/nature03265
  10. J.H. Oerlemans (2005). , Science, 308: 675-677. doi:10.1126/science.1107046
Thanks. Good stuff. Mann pops up in 3 of the 10, same with Jones. Briffa twice.

dig a bit deeper and "peer review" shows some interesting inbreeding too.....

Like I said, there is a reason they keep reproducing each others work.

for those who might be interested, take a look at the core data used. you will find where many of these use the same source material.

One starts to wonder if they are looking over each others shoulders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2009, 04:28 PM
 
4,104 posts, read 5,309,423 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Generate you own data set and subject it to peer review. LOL

Here's a list and yeah the experts in their field do pop up. Not so much people like Michaels. There's a reason. He has nothing original to say.

  1. P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). , The Holocene, 8: 455-471. doi:10.1191/095968398667194956
  2. M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). , Geophysical Research Letters, 26(6): 759-762.
  3. Crowley and Lowery (2000). , Ambio, 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). , Science, 289: 270-277. doi:10.1126/science.289.5477.270
  4. K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). , J. Geophys. Res., 106: 2929-2941.
  5. J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). , Science, 295(5563): 2250-2253. doi:10.1126/science.1066208.
  6. M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). , Geophysical Research Letters, 30(15): 1820. doi:10.1029/2003GL017814.
  7. P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). , Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. doi:10.1029/2003RG000143
  8. S. Huang (2004). , Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. doi:10.1029/2004GL019781
  9. A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). , Nature, 443: 613-617. doi:10.1038/nature03265
  10. J.H. Oerlemans (2005). , Science, 308: 675-677. doi:10.1126/science.1107046

What about the "3000" scientists we keep hearing about?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:21 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top