David Flick wrote:
KeithE wrote:David, "warmists" (as you call them in your politer moments) are not saying hot/warm weather kills more people than cold weather. That is not the issue. They are merely saying, temperatures are going up and there are ill-effects now and they are growing.
The warmists may be "merely saying" that temperatures are going up and there are ill-effects now and they are growing, but that's completely false. It's propaganda to suggest that ill effects to rising temperatures are somehow unusual or that they are growing at a rate previously not seen. The warmists are unwilling acknowledge that there have been warmer periods with greater ill effect in the past than currently observed. Here's what Taylor wrote in the article:
"According to National Weather Service data, however, record high temperatures were [more] prevalent [in] the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s than they are today." Translation: It's documented fact, based on National Weather Service data, that record high temperatures were more prevalent in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s than they are today. Warmists would have you to believe that record temperatures today have never been seen prior to the last decade. But that's alarmist propaganda.
Besides the denialist article you quoted is not very careful about their backup to the claim that:
"They (alarmists) are also misleading people into believing hot temperatures kill more people than cold temperatures"
Their backup was that:
"An article in the Tuesday, July 27 Washington Post claims “High temperatures claim more lives in the United States than tornadoes, hurricanes, floods and lightning combined – about 700 a year, according to official estimates.”"
Nothing about cold weather which does in fact kill a lot of people.
You missed Taylor's point. You need to read the entire first paragraph, specifically the underlined clause in the first sentence.
“Global warming” is rapidly increasing Northern Hemisphere temperatures, as it does every summer, but alarmists in the media are doing their best to make it seem like summer heat waves never occurred before. They are also misleading people into believing hot temperatures kill more people than cold temperatures.
No David you have missed the point. Taylor is saying the media has said there have never been summer heat waves before. Huh?? Show me where the media says this. And Tayor is also saying the media says 'hot temps kill more than cold temps'. Again show me where they say that. Certainly not in the evidence Taylor brought forward.
Taylor is trying to cast the media as claiming something it does not even claim. Strawman argumentation to say the least. The evidence Taylor cites is from the Washington Post article (his quote of that is above) which does not say anything of the sort to buttress either claim. He then claims the Atlanta Constitution said 'there have never been summer heat waves before', or 'hot temps kill more than cold temps'. It says nothing of the sort. What it said (in an editorial) was (assuming Taylor quote is correct and taken in context):
“We’d better get used to miserable, scorching summers. We can stop using the term ‘heat wave’ to describe what will become a routine pattern of high temperatures, overtaxed electricity grids and epidemics of heat strokes. According to NASA, all but one of the ten hottest years on record were since 1999,” writes Cynthia Tucker.
Again nothing about Taylor's thesis that the media is ballyhooing that 'there ahve never been summer haet waves before' or 'hot temps kill more than cold temps'. Tucker's advice to be prepared for hot weather is appropriate - knowing her general viewpoints, she probably advocates for providing warmth/shelter to the poor during cold snaps. She is also right about the hottest 9 of 10 hottest years have been since 1999.
Hottest Years in order with temp anomaly:
So 9 of the hottest years have been from 1999 on, just as Cyhthnia Ticker says. In fact 10 of 10 of the hottest has been since 1998 and 9 of 10 hottest has been since 2001. Tucker is quite conservative in her statement actually.
BTW, for the year June 2009-May 2010 the anomaly is 0.82C
And BTW, the hottest year in the 1930's was 1938 with a temp anomaly of 0.15C.
NASA Data here
Look at the year column and the J-D column.
Read closely with rationality and check the DATA, not your emotions David.
David wrote:It gets warm, even hot, every summer. The record temperatures which have been recently cited in various locations around the globe are not unusual. Record temperatures occur somewhere on the globe virtually every summer. There have been record temperatures since man began keeping records. There isn't anything unusual about record warm temperatures anywhere on the globe. The alarmists would lead you to believe that record temperatures are occurring with alarmingly increasing frequency. But again, that's part of the warmist propaganda.
What is unusual is the diffrence in numbers of hottest records vs number of coldest records. That is consistent with the fact that the mean has increased. In my book "Extreme Weather" by Chrtsopher Burt (who keeps tabs at the site extremeweatherguide.com), there is a plot that shows how many hot and cold records there have been in each decade based on painstaken review ofthe National Weather Service Data of 303 sites:
The 30's did see a lot of high temps across the USA (162) but it also had a lot of cold records (101). It was a violent period of weather with dust bowls, etc. The period 2000-2006 (which Burt updates at extremeweatherguide.com) has 74 hottest and 1 coldest record by Dec 2006. By my count, there are 61 additional high temps thru July 2010 (making 135 high temps in the 2000s) and 3 new low temps (making 4 in the 2000's). Taylor makes a valid point about the 30's having more high temp records. But not the 40s and 50's as Taylor claims the NWS says - but provides no references - why would he? it woudl prove him wrong; besides he is preying on the already duped so why bother with facts. Pretty much demonstrates your "translation" in blue above
Again David, check the facts behind your articles - they are often vacuous and they seldom give references.
But what Taylor and you (David) miss is the ratio of high temp vs low temp records. That ratio is 1.6
for the 30's and 36
for the 2000's. That is most unusual and buttresses teh well known fact that (for the US at least) the mean temp has risen. Other data shows the US has not seen as much GW as has the world as a whole.
David wrote: Michael Mann's fraudulent hockey stick graph is fodder for the warmists who somehow think that the earth has reach a warming period that has been previously unseen in the past millenium. But that also is propaganda because Mann completely omitted the Medieval Warming Period (MWP) from his graph. It's common knowledge that the a MWP was much warmer on average than the hottest temperatures of the last two decades.
We are now well above the MWP (temp anomaly of +0.1C even with the highest reconstruction):
This plot if updated would show a value of +0.82C for the year June 2009- May 2010. Data here
at bottom of page.
And most scientists believe that the MWP was only local to Europe. From David's favorite source Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) occurred from about AD 950–1250, during the European Middle Ages. Initial research on the MWP and the following Little Ice Age (LIA) was largely done in Europe, where the phenomenon was most obvious and clearly documented. It was initially believed that the temperature changes were global. However, this view has been questioned; the IPCC Third Assessment Report from 2001 summarises this research, saying "... current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this time frame, and the conventional terms of 'Little Ice Age' and 'Medieval Warm Period' appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries". Global temperature records taken from ice cores, tree rings, and lake deposits, have shown that, taken globally, the Earth may have been slightly cooler (by 0.03 degrees Celsius) during the 'Medieval Warm Period' than in the early and mid-20th century. Crowley and Lowery (2000)  note that "there is insufficient documentation as to its existence in the Southern hemisphere."
Note that Wiki references stuff with papers that have data in them.
So what is fraudalent is all the denialists' wild claims that the MWP was hotter than today (or even the avergae of the last 2 decades as the denialists try to sneak into the discussion since they know the last decade has been the hottest - stuck on high). But they are wrong even with that deception. The MWP was at most 0.1C temp anomaly (actual the mean of all reconstructions is below 0C). Average for the 90's and 00's is about +0.3C.
David wrote: KeithE wrote:
As far as temperature extremes in the US, there have been only 3 "coldest" record months/seasons set since Jan 2007 compared to 61 "warmest" or "hottest" record months/seasons according to the records given below.ExtremeWeatherGuide Records
You don't read the data very well, Keith. At least not in this case. Go back and compare all
warm weather (summer
) records as compared to all
cold weather (winter
) records. I did a quick count and found 112 winter records, which included *
record snow falls, *
record snowiest winters, *
record snowiest months, etc. When you compare the winter records to the summer records on the extreme weather list, the winter records beat the summer records by a factor of 2 to 1. You can spin the data all you want, but the extreme weather records on that page clearly show that cold weather records blow the warm weather records out of the water... As such, your extreme weather page supports my argument way better than it does yours.
I almost pre-empted that discusion about snowiest records. I did read all
the records, but snow amount records does not equate to extreme cold temp records. Thought even you would concede that. Snow requires relatively cold temps - below ~32F (that is obvious). But it does not serve well as an indicator of extreme cold temperatures (which usually are below 0 F). BTW, GW is also often correlated with greater precipitation (floods and snow fall) and greater droughts. But these are only correlations that do not have an agreed-to theory behind them. I know that drives you wild, that alarmists will claim any new data supports their cause. But you cannot use the snow records as indicators of Global Cooling - no way. Likewise GWist's should stick to science (data + supporting theory) and there is a plethora of data indicated global warming plus well founded Greenhouse theory (to all reasonable, non-ideologued scientists that is). So I'll retract the EDF link not because I know they are wrong but because I'm not certain that GW has caused more floods/drought/hurricane occurences without theory to buttress the observations. But the correlations are there. As for AGW that is UNDENIALABLE SCIENCE - data + theory (only 3% of scientists who study/write on GW the most, object to AGW).
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.