2012 hottest year on record in continental U.S., NOAA says

[Murky]

Last year was the hottest on record for the continental United States, shattering the previous mark set in 1998 by a wide margin, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced Tuesday.

The average temperature was 55.3 degrees, 1 degree above the previous record and 3.2 degrees more than the 20th-century average. Temperatures were above normal in every month between June 2011 and September 2012, a 16-month stretch that hasn’t occurred since the government began keeping such records in 1895.

Federal scientists said that the data were compelling evidence that climate change is affecting weather in the United States and suggest that the nation’s weather is likely to be hotter, drier and potentially more extreme than it would have been without the warmer temperatures.

Last year’s record temperature is “clearly symptomatic of a changing climate,” said Thomas R. Karl, who directs NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center. Americans can now see the sustained warmth over the course of their own lifetimes — “something we haven’t seen before.” He added, “That doesn’t mean every season and every year is going to be breaking all-time records, but you’re going to see this with increasing frequency.”
link

I'm curious to see what the climate change 'skeptics' have to say about this.

 

[strijder20]

Well, it's weather (and I'm not a denier, by the way). Even if temperature would be stable, then you'd still have a hottest year every now and then (although less and less over time).

Of course, having a hottest year makes it more likely the temperature is rising.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I'm more of a "Climate change skeptic" than I am a "Climate change denier" (I don't outright deny climate change, although I believe if it is happening it is both out of our control and something technology will eventually get us out of) but I see no reason why the fact that it just so happens to be the hottest year on record would prove global warming.

If there were multiple years in a row, or even several years in a decade where records were broken, that's another story, (Still not conclusive, but more so) but just one year really doesn't prove a whole lot.

Gotta run, may add more later.

 

[Dale]

I'm curious to see what the climate change deniers have to say about this.

Look at the whole picture mate.

Yes, it was hot in the US. The US is ~3% of the whole Earth's surface. 2012 global temp was slightly more than 2011, making it the 9th hottest in modern record-keeping.

It must have been pretty cold somewhere else to smooth out the average.

And that's the point. Hot in one region does not prove "global" warming. It shows it was hot in one region. Specially when the global average doesn't change, indicating it must have been colder somewhere else to keep the average.

 

[Murky]

I changed 'denier' to 'skeptic' in the OP even though the majority of climate change 'skeptics' are really just in denial.

 

[duckstab]

I see no reason why the fact that it just so happens to be the hottest year on record would prove global warming.

This is correct.

If there were multiple years in a row, or even several years in a decade where records were broken, that's another story, (Still not conclusive, but more so) but just one year really doesn't prove a whole lot.

Also correct. And there have been multiple such years recently: in fact, the 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998. That's not to say that each year has been warmer than the previous.

Think of it like the stock market. There are crashes from time to time, but that doesn't change the fact that, over a long enough time horizon, the trend is upwards.

One more record year just adds more weight to what the vast majority of mainstream scientists have been claiming for a long time: that the earth is indeed warming.

 

[Dale]

I'm more of a "Climate change skeptic" than I am a "Climate change denier" (I don't outright deny climate change, although I believe if it is happening it is both out of our control and something technology will eventually get us out of) but I see no reason why the fact that it just so happens to be the hottest year on record would prove global warming.

If there were multiple years in a row, or even several years in a decade where records were broken, that's another story, (Still not conclusive, but more so) but just one year really doesn't prove a whole lot.

Gotta run, may add more later.

Sorry for the double post (cross-posting).

It will be difficult to get several years in a row due to natural variability. AGW raises the base temperature slowly over time. Natural variability which changes every year makes the temps bounce up and down around that base. Sure, you'll get a hot year then a cold year, but the overall base is still rising gently.

 

[Murky]

Look at the whole picture mate.

Yes, it was hot in the US. The US is ~3% of the whole Earth's surface. 2012 global temp was slightly more than 2011, making it the 9th hottest in modern record-keeping.

It must have been pretty cold somewhere else to smooth out the average.

And that's the point. Hot in one region does not prove "global" warming. It shows it was hot in one region. Specially when the global average doesn't change, indicating it must have been colder somewhere else to keep the average.

Isn't Australia experiencing the hottest January on record right now Dale?
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/...est-day-on-record-hampers-wildfire-fight?lite
http://www.news.com.au/national/nat...au-of-meterology/story-fncynjr2-1226549102215

If this is occurring in both the US and down-under isn't that an indicator that this problem is global?

 

[Dale]

Isn't Australia experiencing the hottest January on record right now Dale?
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/...est-day-on-record-hampers-wildfire-fight?lite
http://www.news.com.au/national/nat...au-of-meterology/story-fncynjr2-1226549102215

If this is occurring in both the US and down-under isn't that an indicator that this problem is global?

Not that warm in Melbourne but yeah overall, Oz is a bit on the warm side.

Besides, do you understand what led to these conditions? BOM's 2012 climate statement a few days ago make it pretty clear.

1. Near El Nino conditions for the last six months of 2012 caused warmer and drier conditions in the east of the continent (this is normal for these conditions).
2. Previous multiple La Ninos warmed the Indian Ocean which is causing warmer and drier conditions in the west of the continent over the last few months (this is normal for these conditions).
3. Low Antarctic polar vortex index means the usual southern lows we get aren't reaching Australia, which means the southern end of the continent is not able to vent heat (lows allow land to "cool down"). (This is normal for low Antartic Oscillation index)
4. Extreme cold to our north, plus near El Nino conditions mean low numbers of tropical storms to pull the monsoon over the north of the continent, which would have allowed the north and centre of the continent to vent heat. (BTW, our cyclone/monsoon season begins Nov 1 and here two months later the monsoon has not started due to only THREE tropical storms so far, which is HALF THE AVERAGE). (This is normal for positive ENSO years)

A string of bad luck natural events wouldn't you say? Bad luck does not equal AGW.

EDIT: besides, you've only raised the hot surface percentage to 6%. You'll have to do better than that.

 

[Murky]

Not that warm in Melbourne but yeah overall, Oz is a bit on the warm side.

Besides, do you understand what led to these conditions? BOM's 2012 climate statement a few days ago make it pretty clear.

1. Near El Nino conditions for the last six months of 2012 caused warmer and drier conditions in the east of the continent (this is normal for these conditions).
2. Previous multiple La Ninos warmed the Indian Ocean which is causing warmer and drier conditions in the west of the continent over the last few months (this is normal for these conditions).
3. Low Antarctic polar vortex index means the usual southern lows we get aren't reaching Australia, which means the southern end of the continent is not able to vent heat (lows allow land to "cool down"). (This is normal for low Antartic Oscillation index)
4. Extreme cold to our north, plus near El Nino conditions mean low numbers of tropical storms to pull the monsoon over the north of the continent, which would have allowed the north and centre of the continent to vent heat. (BTW, our cyclone/monsoon season begins Nov 1 and here two months later the monsoon has not started due to only THREE tropical storms so far, which is HALF THE AVERAGE). (This is normal for positive ENSO years)

A string of bad luck natural events wouldn't you say? Bad luck does not equal AGW.

EDIT: besides, you've only raised the hot surface percentage to 6%. You'll have to do better than that.

That's not how the Sydney Morning Herald is putting it.

THE heatwave that has scorched the nation since Christmas is a taste of things to come, with this week's records set to tumble again and again in the coming years, climate scientists said.

Scorching temperatures off the charts
US smashes annual record

The hottest average maximum temperature ever recorded across Australia - 40.33 degrees, set on Monday - might stand for only 24 hours and be eclipsed when all of Tuesday's readings come in. The previous record had stood since December 21, 1972.

''The current heatwave - in terms of its duration, its intensity and its extent - is unprecedented in our records,'' said the Bureau of Meteorology's manager of climate monitoring and prediction, David Jones.

''Clearly, the climate system is responding to the background warming trend. Everything that happens in the climate system now is taking place on a planet which is a degree hotter than it used to be.''

As the warming trend increased over coming years and decades, record-breaking heat would become more common, Dr Jones said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ere-to-stay-20130108-2cetq.html#ixzz2HQQZaOt7

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ng-heatwaves-here-to-stay-20130108-2cetq.html

edit:

Slate, Australia Is So Hot They Had To Add a New Color to the Weather Map

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_t...to_weather_maps_fire_danger_catastrophic.html

 

[TomYo689]

I say let the world warm up. We'll grow oranges in Alaska

 

[Dale]

edit:

Note that is a forecast map, which as the article states was downgraded straight away. A lot of what will happen in central Australia depends on what tropical cyclone Narelle does over the next few days. If it comes south and pulls the monsoon down, a lot of the heat will be dissipated.

I noticed the article didn't state this is the first time in Aussie records that all four natural events I mentioned above have occurred at the same time.

Stories in the way of facts, really.

EDIT:
Question for you Murky. How's the weather going in Siberia, China, Korea, India and New Zealand? Is that also "global warming"?

 

[Murky]

Question for you Murky. How's the weather going in Siberia, China, Korea, India and New Zealand? Is that also "global warming"?

Why are there anomalies there? I haven't checked.

 

[Dale]

Why are there anomalies there? I haven't checked.

It might pay for you to do that.

BTW, interesting psychological thing I just noticed. You refer to Australia and US's heat as "global warming", yet refer to known freezing conditions as "anomalies". It's only weather if it's cold?

 

[Berzerker]

global warming is what we get with cleaner air

 

[Murky]

It might pay for you to do that.

BTW, interesting psychological thing I just noticed. You refer to Australia and US's heat as "global warming", yet refer to known freezing conditions as "anomalies". It's only weather if it's cold?

No. You obliviously don't know what climate change is if you think it's only about warming trends. You'd have to be ignorant to think that a coldsnap in Siberia is a sign the global climate is on a cooling trend.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I changed 'denier' to 'skeptic' in the OP even though the majority of climate change 'skeptics' are really just in denial.

I'll admit my bias, I strongly suspect that this is either an abnormality or part of a natural long term cycle of heating and cooling. I will also say that even if I'm wrong about that, I believe technology will eventually deal with the problem. But I don't claim absolute knowledge of anything related to this topic (Well, other than "No government intervention")

 

[Murky]

I'll admit my bias, I strongly suspect that this is either an abnormality or part of a natural long term cycle of heating and cooling. I will also say that even if I'm wrong about that, I believe technology will eventually deal with the problem. But I don't claim absolute knowledge of anything related to this topic (Well, other than "No government intervention")

There's not much point in there being a government, by and for the people, if it never intervenes on their behalf.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Who said I supported a government "By the people and for the people."

 

[TomYo689]

That evil hurricane sandy aid bill! The government must not impede damage on its population by extreme weather