Would most of USA's "weather problems" be solved if North America shifted 20 degrees south? (snowy, averages)
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.
If you look at the deserts across a globe, notice that most of them run along a line around the world. If we shifted the US 20° south, that would put a desert right about through the Seattle to New York line.
Shifting the US south would also give us a lot more land to grow crops on, but we'd have to take over Canada to get the northern land.
It's been historically proven that a population in colder climates tends to be much more advanced in technology, so if we turn into a sub-tropical climate, we might end up being the worse off for it.
I don't think so. The populations in warm temperate climates seemed to do the best. Places with little snow and ice but clear defined warm/cool season. Big cities in ancient times , Thebes, Babylon, Uruk , Alexandria they are not cold climates. They are hot desert climates. Rome and Carthage are warm /hot summer Mediterranean climates. Istanbul is not hot but not freezing at all. Xiadu was in a continental climate, similar to the southern Midwest. Nanjing is a bit warmer temps are similar to the upper South . Hangzhou is similar to Nanjing temps comparable to Tennesee.
For most of time the people who lived in cold climates were Huns other Barbarian types. Even in modern times, the great powers aren't exactly cold places. Even London is 11.7c/53.1 year round and the winter is average 5-6 degrees or in the 40s farenheight.
Sure tropical places aren't the most developed, though they have many people living there and have had more great powers and innovations than really cold places. How many great world cities have an annual temperature below 0 average?
There are few areas of the US that have consistently four distinct seasons due to rapidly warming winter temperatures.
This winter sure, but not on averages. I would say all of the shaded areas are true four season, and some unshaded parts of the south still do have four distinct seasons, just mild ones. (winters in the 40s-50s, spring in the 60s, summers in the 80s, fall in the 70s for example)
Bump because I recently just got back into this stuff. Does this mean that if the Americas were shifted south by 20, 10, or even 5 degrees, there'd be more than three countries in North America, especially with less of Canada being frozen wasteland?
Realized that if the Americas were shifted south by 5, 10, or 20 degrees, Quebec would be where the Northeastern USA would be, just different parts of Quebec. (Also, looking at Google Maps, it's kinda weird how large parts of the Northeast are just 10 degrees south away from being frozen wasteland.)
There are VAST areas of Northern US that have four distinct seasons and cold winters. Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh New York, Philadelphia, Washington DC etc just to name a few
Nope. These last 3 absolutely do not have cold winters, they are objectively cool as can be seen with the lack of snowpack.
If it's above 0C it's objectively not a cold winter. Refer to the UTCI.
Nope. These last 3 absolutely do not have cold winters, they are objectively cool as can be seen with the lack of snowpack.
If it's above 0C it's objectively not a cold winter. Refer to the UTCI.
They are most certainly cold winter's for most people I'd say. Recieving average low temperatures at freezing or below is cold. Cool winters would be more like many Cfb climates with average temperatures being above freezing.
Again this is subjective aswell but my point was to show that ALL these climates recieve four distinct seasons
They are most certainly cold winter's for most people I'd say.
You'd say, but the UTCI would not.
Quote:
There are 10 UTCI thermal stress categories that correspond to specific human physiological responses to the thermal environment. The categories relate to UTCI values as follows: above +46: extreme heat stress; +38 to +46: very strong heat stress; +32 to +38: strong heat stress; +26 to +32: moderate heat stress; +9 to +26: no thermal stress; +9 to 0: slight cold stress; 0 to -13: moderate cold stress; -13 to -27: strong cold stress; -27 to -40: very strong cold stress; below -40: extreme cold stress.
(Note that slight cold stress=cool, that's exactly what cool weather is, it is decidedly distinct from being actually cold weather)
Quote:
Recieving average low temperatures at freezing or below is cold. Cool winters would be more like many Cfb climates with average temperatures being above freezing.
You are overfocusing on the lows. You can't use only lows to claim winters are cold when the highs and averages are above freezing.
The proper term is cool winters overall that have nights a bit cold. If anything I would argue cool is more accurate than cold for perceptions because most will be out during the day when it is cool instead of during night when it is a bit cold.
According to this logic of overfocusing on lows, even places like Little Rock would have cold winters, which is just plain silly.
Quote:
Again this is subjective aswell
There is an objective guide as I've said and that would be the UTCI.
Quote:
but my point was to show that ALL these climates recieve four distinct seasons
And mine is that New York City, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C do not have cold winters. So in this sense they fall short relative to traditional 4 season climates.
Last edited by Can't think of username; 02-12-2023 at 05:36 AM..
You are overfocusing on the lows. You can't use only lows to claim winters are cold when the highs and averages are above freezing.
The proper term is cool winters overall that have nights a bit cold. If anything I would argue cool is more accurate than cold for perceptions because most will be out during the day when it is cool instead of during night when it is a bit cold.
There is an objective guide as I've said and that would be the UTCI.
And mine is that New York City, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C do not have cold winters. So in this sense they fall short relative to traditional 4 season climates.
The trouble with labels in climate, is that they require hard boundaries - you might regard my climate and NYC as both having cool winters, even though they are 8.4C apart.
But I suspect you might not regard my summer and NYC as both sharing either a cool, or warm label, even though they are 6C apart.
The only way to accommodate this inconsistency, is via a subjective sliding scale.
The trouble with labels in climate, is that they require hard boundaries - you might regard my climate and NYC as both having cool winters, even though they are 8.4C apart.
But I suspect you might not regard my summer and NYC as both sharing either a cool, or warm label, even though they are 6C apart.
I can't comment on this because I am not familiar with your climate. I regard your climate's temperatures as falling into whatever category the UTCI puts them into as my views have independently alligned with the UTCI for many years before I knew of its existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90
The only way to accommodate this inconsistency, is via a subjective sliding scale.
A UTCI is a better reference point because it is tailored towards those who have experienced all manner of temperatures and are not overly accustomed to specific heat, cold, etc. I wouldn't call it an inconsistency at all, because it provides an insight into what temperatures feel like if you are acclimatized to the full range instead of a hot or cold side etc.
I can't comment on this because I am not familiar with your climate. I regard your climate's temperatures as falling into whatever category the UTCI puts them into as my views have independently alligned with the UTCI for many years before I knew of its existence.
A UTCI is a better reference point because it is tailored towards those who have experienced all manner of temperatures and are not overly accustomed to specific heat, cold, etc. I wouldn't call it an inconsistency at all, because it provides an insight into what temperatures feel like if you are acclimatized to the full range instead of a hot or cold side etc.
By relying on the hard labels of the UTCI, all you are in effect are saying, is that a temperature of 2.3C, is thermally much the same as a temperature of 10.6C - roughly the difference between December and April in NYC....do you feel that the average New Yorker would see those two months in the same light?
By relying on the hard labels of the UTCI, all you are in effect are saying, is that a temperature of 2.3C, is thermally much the same as a temperature of 10.6C - roughly the difference between December and April in NYC....do you feel that the average New Yorker would see those two months in the same light?
I am not. 2.3C is cool, 10.6C is no thermal stress.
Thermally much the same is not the premise I am getting at. I am talking about the same TYPE of feel.
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.
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.
