March 26, 2010 5:33 PM

Winter Was Fifth Warmest on Record

By
CBSNews
(AP)  It will probably come as a surprise to most Americans, but the winter just finished was the fifth warmest on record, worldwide.

Oh, sure, nearly two-thirds of the country can dispute that from personal experience of a colder-than-normal season.

But while much of the United States was colder than usual, December-February - climatological winter - continued the long string of unusual warmth on a global basis.

And parts of the United States did join in, with warmer-than-normal readings for the season in New England and the Pacific Northwest. Indeed, Maine had its third warmest winter on record, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports.

NOAA's National Climatic Data Center reports that worldwide the average temperature for winter was 54.9 degrees Fahrenheit (12.7 Celsius).

That's 1.08 degrees F (0.60 C) above average for the three-month period.

Contributing to the warmth was an El Nino (el NEEN-yo), a periodic warming of water in the tropical Pacific Ocean, which can influence weather over large areas.

However, worldwide temperatures have also been climbing in recent years, a warming attributed by most atmospheric scientists to chemicals added to the air by human activities since the start of the Industrial Revolution.

In February NOAA reported that the 2000-2009 decade was the warmest on record, easily surpassing the previous hottest decade, the 1990s.

The report for December-February also said:

Warmer-than-average temperatures engulfed much of the planet's surface, with the exception of unusually cool conditions across Europe, parts of Russia and most of the contiguous United States.

The Southern Hemisphere combined land and ocean temperature during the three-month season was the second warmest December-February on record, behind 1998.

Most of Canada had warmer-than-average conditions during winter, resulting in the warmest December-February period since national records began in 1948.

Much of Australia experienced warmer-than-average conditions during the Northern Hemisphere winter (Southern Hemisphere summer), with the exception of cooler-than-average conditions across the northern parts of the country.

AP
Add a Comment See all 37 Comments
by seeker25801 October 5, 2010 5:51 PM EDT
Remember: "Weather" is NOT "Climate"

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/17/2010-running-hot-and-cold/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/19/noaa-on-the-russian-heat-wave-blocking-high/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/26/new-peer-reviewed-paper-refutes-claims-of-blizzards-of-last-winter-being-driven-by-global-warming/
Reply to this comment
by McHarris1 March 28, 2010 3:17 AM EDT
In my humble opinion world weather is and has never been static. The Climate Warmists can juggle the figures all they want... can they explain why in some eons past there were palms and ferns growing, where today we have ice caps? That obviously was not caused by humans and carbon emissions.

I reckon it is time to do away with the IPCC. It has taken money, bought people off, laid down proposals which even their own scientists cannot agree are logical and rational.....

Fire Rajenda Pachauri http://just-me-in-t.blogspot.com/2010/03/attack-best-form-of-defense.html
Reply to this comment
by Noval53 March 27, 2010 4:25 AM EDT
Statics can be manipulated quite easily to get the "desired" result. The UK's Climate Research Unit has been caught red handed playing loosely with data, discarding data, and using dire predictions to stir up a "chicken little" frenzy with climate MAD science. As we get closer to the revival for the climate chaos church in Mexico, we can expect more stories like this to continue. The closer we get to the Mexico Summit, the more climate fear fables will be published, announced, and shouted from the mountain tops.

Climate scientists are no better at predicting the future than stock brokers. What we can predict is that the climate MAD scientists and their zealot supporters will continue to predict doom & gloom for all those that don't support "funding" their research and their political agenda. That political MAD science agenda is leading to oppressive regulations, expensive travel fees, and huge money disappearing in to a United Nations bottomless money pot.
Reply to this comment
by j_mcdonald-2009 March 27, 2010 5:22 AM EDT
More ********. These unfounded allegations and outright lies are getting a bit tedious.
by nycprof March 27, 2010 5:57 AM EDT
Once again the climate deniers are at it with their willful ignorance and reality challenged ideas.

Top Arguments of Anthropogenic Climate Change Skeptics

1) The Earth has been cooling since 1998.
Wrong. Global analyses show 2005 to be the ?warmest? year globally. And most years since 1995 are among the warmest 15 years out of the last 170 years.

2) The Medieval Warm Period (MWP), about 1000 years ago, exhibited warmer temperatures than we see today.
Wrong. While the MWP was indeed a relatively warm period, many 10?s of peer-reviewed papers have shown the temperatures of the last 50 years to be higher than at any time during the last 2,000 years.

3) Computer models of climate change are unreliable.
This might have been a fair comment 10 years ago, but no longer. Climate models, when run in hindcast mode, do a credible job of reproducing the observed climate, but only if they include man-made trace gas effects.

4) Earth history shows that the climate is controlled by the sun.
Partly right but a poor argument against anthropogenic influences. Radiative forcing of the 11 year solar cycle is only about 10% that of recent greenhouse gas forcing. Since solar irradiance is unchanged since 1960, recent warming cannot be so attributed.

Just for the fact, The USA is the only developed country that still has a debate about climate change. For the rest of the developed world the debate is over and climate change is real, and we are the cause. It is sooo embarrassing to see so many Americans with their heads in the sand (or their minds twisted by FOX TV) on this important subject.
See all 6 Replies
by KeithDrippingSprings March 26, 2010 10:47 PM EDT
This is as big a pile as the last bunch of reports. I guess everyone noticed that there was no byline on the story. Deni-ability is very important when you are running a scam. So, when you don't get your cap and trade scheme to work How are you going to steal from the hard working people?

If you add any cost to gasoline it will bankrupt the country. What do you think precipitated the foreclosure fiasco we are in now? Gas prices, is the easy answer. I really don't give a big ____ what they pay for fuel in Europe, our country and our economy can not stand that cost. Mr Green Jeans, you need to find a different way to save the world instead of stealing form the American people with some cap and trade scheme.

I really can't believe that after the truth has been reveled about Global Warming and now the green crowed is changing the name to Climate Change, that it isn't evident to every one, that the elite (we know best bunch of people) will not stop their relentless drive for power and control.
Reply to this comment
by nycprof March 26, 2010 10:32 PM EDT
To ToolMangler1 and the other climate skeptics who come across as willfully ignorant people who are reality challenged.

the last ice age was due to small changes in the shape of Earth's orbit and small variations in the tilt of Earth's axis. Any person who took HS Earth Science or ever watches PBS would know this. the warming afterwards was due to a combination of this PLUS CO2 coming out of the ocean and swamps as the Earth began to warm. CO2 is the great enhancer of climate change. How do I know this. I happen to be a climate scientist who publishes in peer reviewed journals. FYI, 97 % of all climate scientists who publish in peer reviewed journals accept that climate is warming and that it is due to us. So if you want to, stay ignorant, but keep it to yourself.
Reply to this comment
by KeithDrippingSprings March 26, 2010 10:34 PM EDT
97% is just BS
by nycprof March 27, 2010 4:58 AM EDT
Nope, 97% is a poll conducted recently. I know that climate deniers just cant stand facts.
by caeric March 26, 2010 9:04 PM EDT
Two scenarios:

1) Global warming is real. We change our ways and save the world.

2) Global warming isn't real. We change our ways and have a much cleaner and nicer world in which to live.

Either way, we should change our ways.
Reply to this comment
by SanityDivine March 27, 2010 6:02 PM EDT
That doesn't really make sense, does it? C02 is a natural part of the life-cycle on this planet. It is essential for plant life to thrive, which in turn allows for more animal and human life to thrive as well. Even with warmer temperatures, life does better, not worse.

There ARE some real ecological disasters to worry about, but C02 and "global warming" aren't it. What about genetic manipulation of food, major industrial waste dumping, clear cutting forests? Those are some real environmental issues. But what do all of those have in common?

Rich billionaires would not stand to gain by cleaning those up. They would actually lose profits. That's why they love this global warming crock. It can make it look like they care about the environment while they get even more stinking rich, without having to actually do anything to better the environment. It also provides a pretty handy excuse to for government to milk more tax dollars out of people, and control more facets of their lives. They can say to the voting public "Hey, it's not my fault we have to impoverish you and control your life, it's that big bad environment."

This is what it is: Pure political nonsense.
by CBSisCommunist5 March 26, 2010 7:21 PM EDT
Global Warming...Global Warming...Global Warming...


Where is AL Gore and his hockey stick and Nobel prize ?
Reply to this comment
by troutfishyman March 26, 2010 7:49 PM EDT
Fall down on the ground kicking and screaming. waaaaaa!
by syslmod March 27, 2010 11:03 AM EDT
We will also find out that the winter was one of the wettest on record. Another symtom of global warming. By the way, I don't know where Former President Al Gore is.
by seafang March 26, 2010 6:55 PM EDT
Well the experts assert that the whole planet has been cooling or at least stopped warming since 1995; except for that short 1998 el nino.
So yes we had some warm years and now we are having some cold years; and as usual there are a lot of warmer than average years gathered around the maximum.
That's like saying that some of the highest altitudes on the planet can be found up in the mountains.
Reply to this comment
by troutfishyman March 26, 2010 7:50 PM EDT
Your cooling claim is factually not correct. In other words, horse manure.
by nycprof March 27, 2010 5:01 AM EDT
Typical climate deniers untruths
1) The Earth has been cooling since 1998.
Wrong. Global analyses show 2005 to be the ?warmest? year globally. And most years since 1995 are among the warmest 15 years out of the last 170 years.

2) The Medieval Warm Period (MWP), about 1000 years ago, exhibited warmer temperatures than we see today.
Wrong. While the MWP was indeed a relatively warm period, many 10?s of peer-reviewed papers have shown the temperatures of the last 50 years to be higher than at any time during the last 2,000 years.

3) Computer models of climate change are unreliable.
This might have been a fair comment 10 years ago, but no longer. Climate models, when run in hindcast mode, do a credible job of reproducing the observed climate, but only if they include man-made trace gas effects.

4) Earth history shows that the climate is controlled by the sun.
Partly right but a poor argument against anthropogenic influences. Radiative forcing of the 11 year solar cycle is only about 10% that of recent greenhouse gas forcing. Since solar irradiance is unchanged since 1960, recent warming cannot be so attributed.
by rainbowroosie March 26, 2010 6:36 PM EDT
People who read this will either say "I knew it!," or "I knew it!"

Global warming true believers will latch onto it and state "I knew it!...this proves global warming exists just like god (Al Gore) told me."

While non-indoctrinated persons will state "I knew it!...Another dumb a$$ journalist drinks the purple koolaide." (sorry for the Jim Jones simile)

I say "I knew it!...another article that only proves what the reader wants to believe...Can't wait for an "unbiased" account...
Reply to this comment
by troutfishyman March 26, 2010 7:55 PM EDT
You mean the "non-scientist" will make dumb comments about purple koolaide.
by SanityDivine March 27, 2010 5:28 PM EDT
You mean the "scientist" will base his viewpoints not on the hard data and scientific method, but crackpot theories of doom and gloom made up by some politicians and bought off "experts" in order to ram a new derivatives trading scheme down the throats of the world, as well as to introduce new unprecedented controls over the population and previously unheard of taxes. You know, the same kind of "scientist" who worships at the AGW altar regardless of the facts that his religion has been proven false, based on nothing other than manipulations, bully tactics, and propaganda.
by bugwhips March 26, 2010 6:17 PM EDT
This article is just a new herald of more hyped up claims of impending doom coming to us via a complicit media who love a good scare story.

Democrats emboldened by the passage of health bill now turn their eyes on more taxes and a nice $200,000,000,000/year tax on energy is headed our way.

Bottom line is this a dying spasm of the fear mongers or is there more exaggerated lies coming. Since this information is based wholly on warm areas that are claimed to be warmer then normal, but also an area where no temperature measurement instruments exist. An area that right now is well within the +/- 2% variability and is in fact ice is continuing to grow at a unprecedented rate. (Arctic Ice Cap)

"Now, what?s wrong with this picture?

The oddity about the picture is that we are given temperature data where none exists. We have very little temperature data for the Arctic Ocean, for example. Yet the GISS map shows radical heating in the Arctic Ocean. How do they do that?

The procedure is one that is laid out in a 1987 paper by Hansen and Lebedeff In that paper, they note that annual temperature changes are well correlated over a large distance, out to 1200 kilometres (~750 miles)."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/25/gisscapades/
Reply to this comment
by troutfishyman March 26, 2010 7:51 PM EDT
There were no claims of "impending doom" in the article. It simply states some data.
by bugwhips March 26, 2010 8:16 PM EDT
by troutfishyman March 26, 2010 7:51 PM EDT
There were no claims of "impending doom" in the article. It simply states some data.
-------------------------------------------------

Well it's all in how most see this article (along with the coral reefs article) is see the "Impending Doom" as being "implied" with the headline "Winter Was Fifth Warmest on Record" with no reference as to how far the "Record" goes back (one year, two years...billion years). Or are you being coy?
See all 37 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook