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.
Of course the guy has no data to support his hypothesis. In order to become a Dfc climate, both May and September would have to see monthly mean temperatures below 50 degrees F (by Koppen's definition) when averaged throughout an entire normals period, which equals thirty years.
If you go to NOWDATA (https://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=lot), it takes three seconds to see that [at Midway airport] the coldest May on record (1882) had a mean of 51.4 F and the coldest September on record (1993) had a mean of 59.2 F. Similar story for O'Hare Airport (53.2 F and 59.2 F in 1983 and 1993, for May and Sept respectively).
So, if Chicago has not managed to reach the threshold of a Dfc climate for one single year in its 100+ year climate history, then obviously it's not going to do it for a thirty-year period, which logically implies that the guy's claim is nothing but a bunch of nonsense (even if he was exaggerating, which it seems like he's not).
Just to add to that, it should be noted that even Moosonee Ontario (which is a full 10 degrees of latitude further North than Chicago) does not have a Dfc climate. This is a place where an average January day looks like the coldest day of the year in Chicago, and -40 F (which has never happened in Chicago) is reached on a semi-regular basis throughout the winter.
Depends on your definition I suppose.
81' was a fairly mild winter, but 82' featured below normal all of Jan/Feb.
Yes there were a couple mild winters too. That's not out of the ordinary but overall the coldest multi year winter period would be the late 70s
Official Chicago records:
Coldest month on record January 1977
Snowiest winter on record 1978-79
Coldest December on record 1983
Coldest day calendar day on record December 4th 1983
Record low max December 24th 1983
Record low temp January 20th 1985
Lowest wind chill on record Christmas Eve in 1983 when a temperature of -23F and a 29mph wind combined to produce the record low wind chill of 82 below zero (new formula would produce a windchill of -57F)
Longest streak of days below 32(degrees): 43 days from Dec. 28, 1976, to Feb. 8, 1977
Longest streak of days with snow cover: 100 days from Nov. 26, 1978, to March 5, 1979
Greatest snow depth at Chicago: 29 inches on Jan. 14, 1979
Lake Michigan almost frozen over: 1978-79 (more than 90 percent ice cover in 1976-77)
Greatest Number of Days During Winter with Temperatures Below Zero.
2013-14...26 (including one in March)
1884-85…25
1935-36…24
1962-63…24
1981-82…22
1874-75…21
1978-79…21
1872-73…19
Greatest Number of Days in a Month with a Minimum of Zero or Less
17 January, 1977
15 January, 1963
14 February, 1875 January, 1979
13 January, 1887 1888 1912 1982 February 1936
12 January, 1885
Average number of below zero days by decade. Note: Up until 1921 all reading were taken downtown near the lake. From 1921 to 1940 one mile from the lake at UofC. So there is a warm bias for lakeside readings. From 1941 to 1980 at Midway which is 9 miles from the lake and since 1981 at ORD which is about 12 miles from the lake.
OK, so if I'm allegedly wrong, and the temperatures are rising, is all the warmth going off to Florida? Because it sure isn't staying in the Midwest; overall, the winters are getting longer, colder, and snowier, with -40*F wind chills. Which almost never happened before: -20*F wind chills was usually as low as it got, and snow wasn't as heavy as in recent years.
Or maybe the scientists secretly breathing on the thermometers. Hmm... (just kidding about this one)
Don't drag us into this:
"Though the Twin Cities just endured their snowiest February on record, data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that since 1970, Minnesota’s winters have warmed at an average rate of 1.1 degrees per decade — that’s more than five times as fast as the rate of winter warming in previous years.
Longtime residents who enjoy winter sports and activities have done their best to adjust, but it’s not always easy."
and
"Minnesota’s winter season has gotten shorter since 1970, too, with an average of 16 fewer days from the first frost to the last, and about 12 days less of ice cover on the state’s lakes."
"Though the Twin Cities just endured their snowiest February on record, data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show that since 1970, Minnesota’s winters have warmed at an average rate of 1.1 degrees per decade — that’s more than five times as fast as the rate of winter warming in previous years.
Longtime residents who enjoy winter sports and activities have done their best to adjust, but it’s not always easy."
and
"Minnesota’s winter season has gotten shorter since 1970, too, with an average of 16 fewer days from the first frost to the last, and about 12 days less of ice cover on the state’s lakes."
Other than ski resorts and ice fishing tour operators losing some income, isn't it a good thing that winters are warming up? It'll reduce air pollution and lower heating bills, from lesser need to burn fuel. Unless, of course, the "warming" is an increase from -42*F to -38*F, which is almost nothing. In which case, the warming technically happened, but it sure as hell doesn't feel any warmer, especially if combined with higher wind speeds resulting in a lower wind chill. It's like being "technically" a virgin at one's wedding after doing only .
Chicago is going to see more polar vortexes as the jet stream cannot maintain its strength and veers. In between these arctic invasions Chicago will see mild weather.
Chicago is getting more and more precip each year which means it's not going subarctic, subarctic climates usually have lower precip. It means that most of the extra heat it's getting is going towards humidity not heat. Contrast that with California, where most of the extra heat is going towards heat.
Eventually the extra humidity will mean warmer nights starting earlier and lasting longer. So a 45/70 sunny day in the late spring may not be as likely as a 55/60 cloudy day in the spring. This means less of a presence of high pressure and more of a presence of low pressure but not necessarily "colder". Eventually if the night is warm enough then the day will creep up warmer than previously, in the previous example, i.e. 60/65 or 65/70.
Sounds like you are setting up Chicago for Texas style loooong summer weather. Especially East Texas over the drier farther west Texas.
But it would be more like home then in summer for you...... sounds good then.
No polar vortexes pleeeeeze. They head across to the east too. Alberta Clippers are bad enough inching southward toward me. Already effecting New England......
Well, if my memories are indeed fond, doesn't it mean that Chicago indeed had a warmer climate in the recent past? That is, a solid Dfa, rather than teetering on Dfc, like now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavePa
Sounds like you are setting up Chicago for Texas style loooong summer weather. Especially East Texas over the drier farther west Texas.
...
No polar vortexes pleeeeeze. They head across to the east too. Alberta Clippers are bad enough inching southward toward me. Already effecting New England......
If Chicago ever acquired a climate like East Texas (Cfa), I'd think I'm in the bizarro world! There's no way it can get so warm this far north; I don't care what "they" want the public to believe.
I focused on the Midwest, because that's where I live. But I saw the news enough times to know that the northern East Coast is getting colder too, because polar vortexes. It's probably turning Dfc as well, or possibly Cfc due to being on the Atlantic ocean.
Last edited by MillennialUrbanist; 11-06-2019 at 10:18 PM..
Well, if my memories are indeed fond, doesn't it mean that Chicago indeed had a warmer climate in the recent past?
In short, no. There is actually some interesting research about this phenomenon. I've seen it in my own dad. He could swear the climate used to be drastically different (in his case colder) in our hometown in the PNW, but in reality it has only warmed by a couple degrees in his lifetime. He thinks the river used to freeze every year, etc., but it was always a rare event. Just stands out in his memories from childhood.
Our experience of the weather is very subjective. What is cold to one person is warm to another. And that subjectivity can change over your lifetime, so that what used to seem warm and pleasant now seems disappointing or "not as warm as it used to be." It could be because of physiological changes or psychological ones, or it could just be that your mind is emphasizing "good" weather memories from the past and forgetting some of the crappy ones. In any case, instrumental records are obviously far more reliable than the opinion of one person, and they all show Chicago is slightly warming.
Our experience of the weather is very subjective. What is cold to one person is warm to another. And that subjectivity can change over your lifetime, so that what used to seem warm and pleasant now seems disappointing or "not as warm as it used to be." It could be because of physiological changes or psychological ones, or it could just be that your mind is emphasizing "good" weather memories from the past and forgetting some of the crappy ones. In any case, instrumental records are obviously far more reliable than the opinion of one person, and they all show Chicago is slightly warming.
There's some merit to this, but... If we can't trust our own memories, then what/who can we trust? "They" want the public to believe that the whole world is turning into a sauna, and it's "their" freedom to say it, because First Amendment. But individual persons' memories tell a different story: Midwestern winters are getting longer, snowier, and more severe. So who's right and who's wrong? Also, instrumental records might be as inaccurate as alleged individual memories: the thermometers can be tampered with.
Even more so, "averages" seldom, if ever, tell the whole story. An old joke goes: If a man stands with one foot in the oven and the other foot in the deep freezer, then on average, he is comfortable.
It's almost reminds me of a certain book. The one where the Inner Party tells Winston Smith that 2+2=5, and that Oceania was always at war with Eastasia. When in reality 2+2=4, and the previous week's newspaper says that Oceania was at war with Eurasia.
If Chicago ever acquired a climate like East Texas (Cfa), I'd think I'm in the bizarro world! There's no way it can get so warm this far north; I don't care what "they" want the public to believe.
I agree. There is absolutely no evidence showing that Chicago summers are becoming more like East Texas. Not even close. If anything our summers are seeing a diminishing number of 90+ degree days which are common in Texas summers.
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.
.
Alberta Clippers are bad enough inching southward toward me. Already effecting New England......
"They" want the public to believe that the whole world is turning into a sauna, and it's "their" freedom to say it, because First Amendment. But individual persons' memories tell a different story: Midwestern winters are getting longer, snowier, and more severe. So who's right and who's wrong? Also, instrumental records might be as inaccurate as alleged individual memories: the thermometers can be tampered with.
