October - 3rd coldest on record for nation

Aha! It just might take the fickleness of Mother Nature to make some folks see the global warming fiasco for what it is.
 
BBC News - This year 'in top five warmest'

Some sources say this year could be the third warmest on record
This year will be one of the top five warmest years globally since records began 150 years ago, according to figures compiled by the Met Office.
The UK's weather service projects that, unless there is an exceptionally cold spell before the end of the year, temperatures will be up on last year.
Climate sceptics had pointed out that the temperature rise appeared to have stalled in the last decade or so.
That was caused in part by the Pacific La Nina current, which cools the Earth.
But the influence of La Nina declined in the spring and the Met Office project that, barring a very cold December, this year will be the fifth warmest on record.
Other sources say it could even be the third warmest.
The last ten years have been in the top 15 warmest on record. And this summer the UK enjoyed temperatures higher than the long-term average.
Although the Met Office was pilloried after forecasting a "barbecue summer", it was their rainfall forecast, not the projected temperatures, that was wrong.
Next year we will see the influence of the warming El Nino current, and the Met Office says there is a 50% chance that global temperatures will hit an all-time high.
Click to expand...
 
Haven't you forgotten that Puget Sound metro area had the hottest weather on record since the record books from 1891 or so. Seattle reached 103 degrees on July 21.
 
That was a local phenomenom, not a regional or global occurrence. People are predicting that the Northeast will see some of the coldest winter weather in a long time. We'll see.
 
kokonut said:
That was a local phenomenom, not a regional or global occurrence. People are predicting that the Northeast will see some of the coldest winter weather in a long time. We'll see.
Click to expand...

It already proved that ice polar has been melting and polar bear is losing the home.

I know that you and conservative people don't care.
 
global warming is NOT about a local location. What may be the coldest doesn't make it "it's not warming!"
 
Banjo said:
Yep. Still no snow so far.... and it's the 26th of November.
Click to expand...

I know! Last year it was a couple days before Halloween when we got our first snowfall. I really don't want it to be a green Christmas!
 
Actually, no, Foxrac. The Arctic ice isn't melting away. It has waxed and waned. What's more if you look at the graph on sea ice extent from 2002 to present you can see the red line representing 2009 data shows it to be within the range of variability between 2002 data and 2007 data. In fact, it's "recovering" if you want to use that word beginning 2008 and 2009 seeing that sea ice extent began to "recover" since then.
IJIS Web Site

So, no. Polar bears are not losing their homes. There is no scientific basis for that.

For the last 10 years global temperature has not gone up but declined when predictions were saying it'd be going up. That never happened. It's going the other way! And we're at the lowest cycle on sun's energy output where it cycles up and down every 11 years.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Zurich_Color_Small.jpg
 
kokonut said:
Actually, no, Foxrac. The Arctic ice isn't melting away. It has waxed and waned. What's more if you look at the graph on sea ice extent from 2002 to present you can see the red line representing 2009 data shows it to be within the range of variability between 2002 data and 2007 data. In fact, it's "recovering" if you want to use that word beginning 2008 and 2009 seeing that sea ice extent began to "recover" since then.
IJIS Web Site

So, no. Polar bears are not losing their homes. There is no scientific basis for that.

For the last 10 years global temperature has not gone up but declined when predictions were saying it'd be going up. That never happened. It's going the other way! And we're at the lowest cycle on sun's energy output where it cycles up and down every 11 years.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Zurich_Color_Small.jpg
Click to expand...

How is it, that with your claims of a scientific advanced education and a professional in the field, you constantly ignore the fact that global warming does not refer to temp increase only. The shift is bidirectional, and is a reference to extremes in either direction.:roll:
 
kokonut said:
Actually, no, Foxrac. The Arctic ice isn't melting away. It has waxed and waned. What's more if you look at the graph on sea ice extent from 2002 to present you can see the red line representing 2009 data shows it to be within the range of variability between 2002 data and 2007 data. In fact, it's "recovering" if you want to use that word beginning 2008 and 2009 seeing that sea ice extent began to "recover" since then.
IJIS Web Site

So, no. Polar bears are not losing their homes. There is no scientific basis for that.

For the last 10 years global temperature has not gone up but declined when predictions were saying it'd be going up. That never happened. It's going the other way! And we're at the lowest cycle on sun's energy output where it cycles up and down every 11 years.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/Zurich_Color_Small.jpg
Click to expand...

No, your post has nothing to support your claim, I already have source so you can't beat that.
U.S. releases unclassified spy images of Arctic ice | Green Business | Reuters
Revealed: the secret evidence of global warming Bush tried to hide | Environment | The Observer
Arctic Sea Ice Images Derived From Classified Data Should Be Made Public, According To A New Report
Global Fiducials Library

Polar bears does lost alot of home, it is fact.
http://www.wisegeek.com/are-polar-bears-in-danger-from-global-warming.htm
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2476138&page=1
http://www.savebiogems.org/polar/
 
Sorry, I disagree with your claim Kokonut. Polar bears ARE losing their homes which is in arctic circle region, it's killing them and the population have declined. There's even loss of glaciers on the high mountains as well. Keep protecting your conversative pride, dude. Keep up your good work *clap clap* You will be very sorry later on.
 
Funny; something that has been occurring over a couple of decades is considered fiction, but one brief spell of weather in the opposite direction, and you are ready to call it fact.

Oh yeah, I forgot. I am a non-Conservative. Therefore, I am stoopid.

If you find a better set of circumstances that back your claims, wake me up. Zzzzzzzzzzz.
 
Just recently on Fox news, Switzerland is losing a lot of tourist money. Reason? No snow.
 
Back
Top